Super Lawyer

Tag: International Law

  • “I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept.” – Shreya Chaudhary, Associate Attorney at Maune Raichle Hartley French & Mudd, LLC.

    “I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept.” – Shreya Chaudhary, Associate Attorney at Maune Raichle Hartley French & Mudd, LLC.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    As a dual-qualified attorney in California and India, what first sparked your interest in the legal profession, and how did you chart your path in this field?

    I come from a family of lawyers, so this profession was all I knew growing up. I didn’t realize the impact of my dad’s work at the time but saw how his efforts positively affected his clients. I remember that on many occasions, they wouldn’t have enough money for his full fees but would bring him part of their seasonal harvest. Other than that, it came to me more naturally than most people—it never felt like work, and I was so excited to go to law school and later into litigation. Isn’t it a privilege to be in a position to make a difference in people’s lives and also get paid for it?

    For California, I never had plans to move, but I absolutely fell in love with the state and decided to get licensed in the one thing I knew—law!

    You recently passed the California Bar Exam on your first attempt. What preparation strategies proved most effective for you, and what advice would you offer to others aspiring to clear it? How has this qualification expanded your professional scope?

    As for preparation, I took an online bar prep course called Themis. Going to Berkeley Law for my LLM definitely helped, as it put me among the smartest people who have a reputation for passing this difficult exam on their first attempt. Also, it’s crucial to know one’s learning style. I really appreciate learning from my own handwriting, so I wrote everything down even though my bar prep tool didn’t ask me to. I also know that I panic toward the end, so I developed my own timeline, which was different from what the bar prep suggested. I took a study leave from work and had just one goal for those 12 weeks. I ate, slept, meditated, everything centered around my bar prep. Honestly, I loved the drive of taking on something so challenging and had fun with it. There’s no one-size-fits-all way to go about this, and I’m happy to answer specific questions for whoever wants to take this exam.

    As my interest is in litigation-related work, I wouldn’t say it expanded my scope; rather, it created any scope that exists, because one cannot take even a tiny step in litigation without a license to practice.

    Moving from legal practice in India to building a career in the United States must have involved navigating many differences. What were the key hurdles you faced in adapting to the U.S. legal system, and how did you overcome them?

    Oh, so many! I did not have anyone from my family or extended family who was a U.S. lawyer. From choosing law school to taking the bar, applying for internships, jobs, and visas—every step presented hurdles, or should I say, kept life interesting, as my friends like to put it. The biggest one for me is the visa, with, dare I say, the state of affairs right now. Also, finding a job in the U.S. is so different from India. In India, we don’t network enough, which I had to teach myself after moving here. I want to give credit to Berkeley, as they had a whole program to train international lawyers to get acquainted not just with the U.S. legal system but also with its unique job market. I didn’t expect it, but my Indian work experience was valued by U.S. employers as I think the two things, we have in common with them is that they value the “grind,” which they could supposedly see in my resume, and our common law system—and that’s probably why I was a preferred candidate for many jobs I applied to before joining the Office of the District Attorney, Alameda County.

    Work environments in both countries are completely different as well. There are different work ethics, professional relationships, sense of humor, and protocols. However, one funny realization is that lawyers everywhere are more or less the same kind of people so it was still a familiar territory. 

    You have served as an editorial board member for leading legal publications and also worked as a law clerk. How did these roles deepen your understanding of the U.S. legal system and prepare you for your current role?

    U.S. law school journals, and also Indian ones- stimulate a legal mind well. It’s so good to become aware of different ideas, methodologies, and international legal issues, and I think my favorite part of being in a journal was building community with like-minded people. I was in the Ecology Law Quarterly with other environmental law nerds and had some great academic and fun discussions in the process.

    My clerkship with the District Attorney’s Office was my first U.S. job, which makes it special to me. I feel fortunate to have worked for a highly reputed government office in the Consumer, Environment, and Special Litigations Department. It was a fast-paced environment, and there couldn’t have been a better way to learn U.S. law and see it in action than that. I worked on civil procedure assignments, evidence code, and criminal code—all at once. One of my first assignments at the DA’s Office involved prosecuting a corporation after a factory fire that significantly affected air quality for people in that vicinity, given California’s high ambient air quality standards. These assignments strengthened my understanding of environmental enforcement and also informed my approach to research, brief-writing, and attention to detail in my current role.

    During your LL.M. at UC Berkeley, you specialized in Energy Law and Clean Technology while contributing to journals like the Berkeley Technology Law Journal and Ecology Law Quarterly. How did these academic and editorial experiences influence your perspective on the intersection of law, technology, and environmental sustainability?

    A topic that’s very close to my heart is climate change. We treat it as “important” but not “urgent,” which troubles both my personal and legal mind. At Berkeley Law, I enrolled in courses such as Environment and Energy Law, subscribed to technology- and environment-related journals, and participated in clean energy student groups to engage with these issues and understand the work of scholars in the field. Being surrounded by like-minded people strengthened my commitment and deepened my understanding of how cleaner technologies are urgently needed on a global scale. The intersection of use of environmental resources and law is particularly interesting to contrast between the US, Europe and Indian laws. We have many vulnerable communities who get affected first by the impacts of degrading environment and climate crisis, and there is a lot of work that remains to be done to protect them. 

    In your current role, you work to support mesothelioma victims and their families. What drew you to this area of law, and how do you balance the legal complexities with the human and emotional dimensions of these cases?

    I honestly don’t know how to answer this question. From my practice in the Allahabad High court, Lucknow, to here in California, I have struggled with getting too attached to the outcome and client’s problems. I don’t know if that makes me a better or a worse lawyer. But I try to overcome that by something my senior told me early on during my India days that “you play a very small role in the grand scheme of things.” I owe my client to do my best work for their entrustment in me as their lawyer but I sure cannot change their destiny. Very recently, a client of mine passed away from mesothelioma (cancer) before the case went to trial which happens more often than not in this field. I witnessed his struggle through the deposition and eventually he just couldn’t make it to the end of the case. It breaks my heart but if I have done my role well, then it becomes easier to strike that balance. This also keeps me on my toes to put in the hard-work. 

    What advice would you give to students aiming for an international legal career, and how can they stay ahead of global legal developments?

    Just a few simple things. First, one needs to figure out if they want to study here, do an LLM or a JD, or directly take the California Bar (the only U.S. bar open to foreign attorneys without coursework). My advice would be to study here first, as it helps one get acquainted with the culture and decide whether it’s the right fit. Moreover, getting a job is nearly impossible without a strong network, which a renowned university greatly helps with. A warning—it is very expensive. I chose Berkeley over other good colleges that offered me scholarships because it was one of my dream schools, but one should always rank priorities according to their circumstances. Advance research on scholarships and on-campus jobs could help. I had an on-campus job that helped me a lot financially during school. It’s important to work smart—so if the plan is to immigrate to a new country, students should also consider Canada, Singapore, or the UK (the more welcoming ones in today’s environment). 

    One thing I would have done differently is to have a better long-term plan at least a year in advance of actually applying. I didn’t understand at the time that this decision would completely reshape my life as I know it. But I would love to help anyone who has doubts about the process or wants to learn from my experiences—feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn.

    With the demands of your profession, how do you maintain balance in your personal pursuits, and what is your vision for the future of your practice?

    The litigation work culture in the US is similar to India as the work never stops from the inception of the case till the verdict. One can easily preoccupy themselves as there is always so much to do. However, in my experience, that sometimes leads to isolation, and when you are thousands of miles away from family, building a community becomes equally important. When I’m not working, I spend time with my friends, which is my number one priority as rejuvenated weekends significantly boost my motivation through the week. We often travel and hike in nature, as California is truly blessed with pleasant weather throughout the year. Of course, there are weekends that turn into working ones when the need arises like meeting a court deadline on Monday but I don’t mind that because I genuinely love what I do and take pride in showing up for my clients who are unfortunately struggling to live.

    I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept. Right now, my focus is on mastering California law and becoming as confident in this system as I was in India. The process of adapting to a new legal culture has been challenging but also deeply rewarding—it’s pushed me to grow, think differently, and refine my craft. Whatever I’ve gained intellectually, I’d definitely want to leverage it to contribute to the Indian legal landscape in different ways, for eg.  I am working on a research paper on a social legal challenge that India faces; Grow as a multi-jurisdictional professional, and have fun along the way.

    Get in touch with Shreya Chaudhary –

  • Chasing Questions, Not Glory: Crafting a Global Legal Career  – Dr. Argha Kumar Jena, International Disputes Lawyer and Advisor.

    Chasing Questions, Not Glory: Crafting a Global Legal Career  – Dr. Argha Kumar Jena, International Disputes Lawyer and Advisor.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Your academic journey includes a full-scholarship Ph.D. in International Law and Economics from Rome and an LL.M. from Berlin. How has this interdisciplinary training influenced your understanding of economic analysis in the development of international legal norms and dispute resolution mechanisms? 

    Public international law in general requires deep academic insight considering that the efficaciousness of the ‘rule of precedents’ (if any) is volatile in practice. When it comes to International Economic Law (as we like to call it), issues in dispute concern not only economic treaties but its complex interactions with the branches of applicable national laws as well as commercial realities. In such instances, having cultivated the habit of interdisciplinary thought processes can certainly help in strategizing efficiently. ISDS being a form of dispute resolution where effects of economic policies are often subject to adjudication by international tribunals – requires one to understand macroeconomic impacts of such policies and/or measures and also analyze it within the contours of the facts. Dispute resolution mechanisms flowing from treaties are a herd of unicorns within the fields of law. Hence, having a wider field of intellectual vision that one may acquire through interdisciplinary academic pursuits and exposure to multiple legal systems can certainly help. However, I maintain that institutional education is not the only way of going about it. My journey is the consequence of my choices, that I remain happy about. 

    You pursued your Ph.D. in International Law and Economics while working full time, a challenge few take on. What was that experience like, and how did you manage the demands of both academic research and professional responsibilities?

    This again was a consequence of one of the choices that presented itself to me. Applying for Ph.D. Scholarships is a full-time job in itself, and I understood that from the failures of my initial attempts. Identifying a research gap, crafting a proposal and a plan of execution, having it critiqued from experts, choosing a Supervisor, shortlisting universities with appropriate departments, and then making it within the deadlines – all of these mandatory steps to begin a Ph.D. are time-consuming and require dedicated efforts. Luckily, during my stint at a boutique law-firm in Berlin, I had come to be professionally acquainted with a leading expert in the field of international economic law, Prof. Steffen Hindelang. Having already started to work with him part-time, while still at the law firm – allowed me to ease into the process. With time, I was exposed to several complex questions of law and started to learn approaches that experts take while opining on a matter of international economic law. My association with the Professor put me into a network of an intelligentsia, whose sharp and unfiltered critique helped me work on the list of what to do. As I continued to assist him in several of his engagements as an expert in several international forums and arbitrations, my ability to gain context expanded. Before trying to solve a problem, I got to understand a wider gamut of the field within which the solution was to be proposed. This led me to choose a Ph.D. theme that lay in the intersection of what I was working on, and what I could develop it into i.e., “Fate of Protectionism in International Investment Control: A Sustainable Development Perspective”. After 6/7 months of refining my proposal, I found the opportunity in Rome i.e., a rare interdisciplinary Ph.D. programme in economics and law – where I applied with my proposal and ended up getting selected. While the scholarship required me to move to Rome, I continued my role with the Professor that expanded over time as well. As my research and work were largely in the same field, both complemented each other. Being in Rome, allowed me the opportunity to work on a novel project on investment contracts at UNIDROIT. All of it together was indeed a demanding endeavour, but the symbiosis between all the engagements rendered it possible. Of course my mentors, supervisor, and university enabled me to travel and engage adequately to participate in forums of exciting discussions that kept me motivated. It was the ecosystem that made it possible for me.   

    With close to a decade of experience across Germany, Italy, and India, how has your cross-border legal practice informed your strategy in advising global clients, especially in high-stakes commercial arbitrations and international contract negotiations?

    A multi-jurisdictional exposure with the fortune of having hands-on experience throughout – is essentially a professional upbringing narrative. Having been successful at surrounding myself with people smarter than me in several instances has taught me much. As we all know, Civil Law and Common Law – being the two distinct forms of legal systems co-exist with characteristic differences whose intricacies one can experience better while working on cases that necessitate grappling with them. In my limited experience, understanding of differences in procedural and substantive law of contrasting jurisdictions is a non-negotiable for lawyers who want to work on matters ‘international’. So indeed, I now take into account more things in my analysis of facts and law, including cultural and systemic differences of jurisdictions. And most importantly, it helps me delineate the questions that I need help with, when corresponding with my colleagues outside India.  

    In terms of stakes – one must understand that in cross-border disputes, stakes are usually high by default. The process is complex and expensive for the parties concerned, hence is resorted to when stakes are generally high.   

    Your path to becoming a Principal Associate at DMD Advocates has been anything but conventional. What were some key turning points in your journey, and how did they prepare you for your current leadership role? Also, in your role at DMD Advocates, you lead advisory work on cutting-edge issues like crypto-assets and artificial intelligence. How equipped do you think the Indian legal system is in comparison to other jurisdictions to address the legal complexities emerging from digital assets and algorithm-driven systems?

    As key turning points, I would list three of them, (i) having had the opportunity to work and learn under an academic lawyer, that showed me a novel career path that I can tweak for myself, is possible; (ii) moving to Rome, that allowed me to be close to UNIDROIT and get acquainted with some experts who advise on matters concerning Digital Assets; (iii) deciding to move back to India for the opportunity at the Ministry of Finance, which allowed me to apply whatever I learnt to matters of economic treaties on a daily basis. 

    As for my role in DMD Advocates, I am a part of the dispute resolution and litigation team. Here I work on matters concerning both Indian law and International law. Working cultures differ across continents and countries, but it is usually inconsequential to engage in comparisons. However, my style of collaboration with colleagues (including my juniors), as I like to think it, is a blend of German directness in terms of giving and taking feedback, Italian tendency to ease into things unless necessary to do otherwise (I detest fake emergencies) and the signature Indian adaptability in making the best of what is available. 

    In terms of advisory in new technologies, a lawyer’s take is necessitated by the fact that the legal framework applicable doesn’t immediately change, instead it often may need to evolve. Hence, identifying gaps in the legal and regulatory frameworks and advising on account of realities, is a primary need of the hour. However, given the pace in which the digital economy of the world is changing, new challenging questions requiring interdisciplinary approaches are becoming increasingly common for those of us who are active in space. In terms of how prepared the Indian legal system is to adapt to new technologies, I think we have enough smart brains in the country to do the needful. The contextual regulatory landscape is evolving across the world, and India is no exception. It is the age of geoeconomics after all.       

    Having represented clients from the EU, Asia, and the Middle East in arbitration and contract-related matters, what recurring legal risks or contractual pitfalls have you observed in cross-border commercial transactions? Could you share a case study that was most interesting yet challenging for you?

    In terms of pitfalls in international contracts, there are many that I am aware of, but recurring ones include, (i) a uniform and well drafted choice of law/applicable clause across the master contracts and sub-contracts; (ii) lack of explicit referencing of the terms and conditions to a (cross-border) purchase order; and (iii) lack of well drafted hardship and/or force majeure clauses. While any of the three things that I have mentioned may seem elementary to contracts, they have observably caused several complexities that allow dispute resolution to be consequently delayed, albeit for justifiable reasons. 

    It would be difficult to provide a case study in the amount of detail that would be useful for students, but here is something that seems novel but is not. In major construction projects, the contractual framework consists of the master contract, several sub-contracts and also sub-sub-contracts. An arbitral award was passed against an Indian entity (a sub-contractor in such a project) in an international commercial arbitration. However, by the time the award was rendered, the award debtor was declared insolvent by the NCLT. As the lawyers advising the award creditors (who were European), one had the option of following the traditional route of participating in the insolvency proceedings as one of the creditors. However, rather than merely accepting the limited recovery prospects of traditional insolvency proceedings, one may identify alternative enforcement strategies leveraging the complex contractual architecture typical of major construction projects. Subject to the impact of applicable laws, an option could be pursuing parent company guarantees or performance bonds that were likely executed as part of the master contract arrangements. However, we ended up using several indemnity and guarantee clauses in the contractual framework to get the main contractor and the investors in the insolvent company to settle with us on a reasonable quantum.  

    Your experience spans both private and public international law, from assisting European governments in ICSID proceedings to advising the Indian government on WTO and UNCITRAL matters. In your view, what is the future of international investment law amid rising protectionism, digital sovereignty, and shifting geopolitical alliances?

    Investor-State Disputes, and their backgrounds vary greatly in the contexts of the countries involved. So, oversimplification of such complex constructs would be bordering on generalization – that is rather impressible in my profession. However, I can safely say that international investment law is at its adolescence. The procedural reform efforts to ISDS triggered in 2017 at the best of the UNCITRAL Working Group III, have made significant progress in some areas, especially in the context of procedural and crosscutting issues and instruments designed with a focus on mitigation of disputes. One must appreciate that while international investment law principles become seemingly sophisticated, the dispute resolution mechanisms contained in treaties also appear to evolve with time. While ISDS as a method of dispute resolution amongst sovereigns and private entities – is here to stay, the intricacies of its processes and the nature of the disputes themselves are bound to evolve, in light of the new technologies. The typology of policies that may come to be challenged under such a characteristic legal regime would certainly expand. New technologies (including Crypto-currency and Artificial Intelligence) have the potential to creep into the fact patterns of investment and trade disputes.          

    You’ve taught at institutions ranging from Uppsala University to UNIDROIT and South Asian University. Based on your global academic engagements, what do you see as the biggest pedagogical gap in training future international economic lawyers, and what resources or practices would you recommend for staying ahead?

    One of the most visible differences in Indian and European academia, at the graduate and post-graduate level is the student-teacher ratio, which is of course smaller/narrower in Europe. In my estimation, that difference can manifest in terms of student output, if the teaching methods are not curated well. In India, the number of students is higher, so a Professor’s workload will inevitably increase if old teaching methods are retained without integration of new technologies. I would imagine that post-graduation programmes (especially LL.M.s) in India can be modulated to compete with the quality in Europe, UK or USA. Given that most lawyers wouldn’t pursue Doctorates, a post-graduate degree program (like an LL.M.) would be the last stint in institutional education for many future lawyers. We should do our own parts to finish it well! 

    Some European universities use in their post-grad programmes a Problem-Based Learning (PBL) method, where every day’s lectures are accompanied by an application-based exercise and group activities. Indian universities also implement several of such methods, albeit in variance. However, some Eruopean testing methods include an examination for each module (which is always partly or fully open book) and an essay on a topic of their choice guided by Professors. For this to be effective in India, would need significant heavy-lifting by the Professors to design such open-book examinations and their grading methods that accounts for the behavioral patterns of Indian students. The pedagogical gaps, if any, I believe are (i) the lack of curated courses that necessitate post-graduate students to think in terms of real-life problems in examinations that they care about; (ii) lack of automated grading/marking in examination design that aim to test descriptive knowledge or memory retention. 

    As an enthusiast of international economic law, I believe staying atop geopolitical and new technologies news starts as difficult, but after a few months of regular reading becomes easier as one learns to drown the noise. The ORF Newsletter, CSIS Geoeconomics Bi-Weekly Newsletter are good places to start if you cannot read daily. The Economist and Economic Times, manages to keep pace with developments. However, one must cut to the source of the regulation or law concerned to form their own opinion. For investment arbitration news, popularly there is GAR, IAReporter, and Kluwer Arbitration Blog. For AI Research the newsletter from LORE, is quite insightful, I think. While several independent media sources can also be insightful, recommendations may vary according to areas of interest. 

    Get in touch with Dr. Argha Kumar Jena –

  • “Being dual-qualified in both India and California, allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems.” – Anuja Shah, Privacy, IP & Tech Lawyer  ant Inventus Law, California.

    “Being dual-qualified in both India and California, allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems.” – Anuja Shah, Privacy, IP & Tech Lawyer  ant Inventus Law, California.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    With several years of experience in the legal industry, and an international practice, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? What experiences guided you toward specializing in this particular field of IP and Data Privacy, and how did your law school journey shape your career?

    Growing up, I was the inquisitive child in the family, always asking questions like “Why?” “What does this mean?” and “How does this work?”, not to challenge authority, but out of genuine curiosity. So, when it came time to choose a career path, law felt like less of a decision and more of a natural evolution. After all, what better profession for someone who spent their childhood debating dinner table negotiations? Law gave me a way to turn that endless curiosity into something constructive, to ask better questions, find sharper answers, and help others navigate the “whys” and “what ifs” of the world.

    But law was not my first choice. As a kid, I was equally captivated by science and believed I might one day become an aeronautical engineer. One of the defining moments that shifted my perspective occurred while watching Kalpana Chawla on the news during the Columbia shuttle tragedy alongside my father. I remember wondering, What happens when science fails? Who steps in when technology breaks down? That moment planted the seed for a different kind of career, one that still engages with science and innovation, but from a legal lens.

    That curiosity eventually led me to intellectual property law, where science, technology, and legal reasoning collide in wonderfully complex ways. During law school in India, I immersed myself in this area through internships at prominent law firms, gaining exposure to a broad range of IP matters, including trademarks, copyright, technology, media, gaming and gambling, and entertainment law. The ever-evolving nature of IP, driven by innovation, fascinated me. I realized that IP law was not just about protecting rights, it was about fostering creativity, enabling progress, and balancing competing interests in a dynamic, global environment.

    Thus, after graduation, I joined a law firm as an IP attorney to get a deeper understanding of the field, and just as I was getting comfortable, the GDPR arrived and I was hooked. The realization that lawyers have to adapt just as fast as the tech world made privacy law feel less like a compliance checklist and more like a moving target that I genuinely enjoyed chasing.

    Eventually, that passion brought me to the Bay Area, the land of startups and innovation. Studying IP and data privacy here was not just about career growth; it was about being at the heart of change, surrounded by people building the future, and occasionally breaking things that lawyers then have to fix.

    Looking back, my career has been shaped by one simple fact: I never stopped asking “why?” The difference now is that I have learned how to put those questions into memos, and a commitment to helping clients navigate the complex interplay between law, technology, and human creativity.

    Starting your career with a prominent law firm, what were some key learning experiences during the early stages as you were mastering the fundamentals? Given the complexity and constant evolution of Data Privacy Laws, how did you develop an understanding of the field and stay ahead of emerging trends?

    When I first started my career as an IP attorney at a law firm, freshly out of law school, I imagined a steady path through the world of trademarks and copyright. And for a while, that is exactly what I got: think counterfeit sneakers, branding disputes, and the occasional “no, you cannot copyright a concept” conversations.

    But here is the twist no one warns you about in law school, clients do not show up with neatly categorized problems. They often bring you messy, modern dilemmas. And that is how I found myself dipping my toes into the complex pool of data privacy.

    Working with clients ranging from mom-and-pop retailers to Fortune 500 tech giants, I quickly realized that every product launch or branding campaign had a digital component, and where there is data, there is drama.

    Initially, my work was trademark-focused. But adjacent issues kept knocking on my door: copyright quirks, customs enforcement, and eventually, a new breed of question: “Hey, does our app accidentally violate three different international privacy laws?” Spoiler: it often did.

    Slowly but surely, the law kept up to the technological development with the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), aka “the EU’s gift to lawyers everywhere.” The Brussels effect had lawyers and tech enthusiast everywhere scrambling to understand cross-border compliance, and enough acronyms to make your head spin. What fascinated me was not just the law itself, it was the broader question of how we regulate innovation. The boundaries between intellectual property, consumer rights, and data governance began to blur, and I realized, this was the future.

    What started as a curiosity has become a cornerstone of my practice. Privacy isn’t just a hot topic, it is a critical lens for understanding the intersection of innovation, ethics, and law in the digital age.

    To stay updated and ahead of emerging trends, I rely on a well-balanced mix of strategies: regularly reviewing regulatory updates and key case law, tuning into insightful podcasts and panel discussions on evolving privacy topics, and subscribing to a few carefully curated newsletters. I have also joined privacy book clubs where we regularly discuss upcoming privacy regulations and challenges faced in the field. 

    So, while I did not imagine a career in the intersection of IP, privacy, and consumer protection, I am glad it happened. And for all the challenges this field throws at us, one thing is for sure: Privacy law is never boring.

    After over four years at a law firm, you chose to pursue a Master’s degree at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, specializing in Technology Law, Privacy Law, and Intellectual Property Law. What inspired you to focus on these areas, and how did your studies shape your understanding of data privacy laws on a global scale? Additionally, as a Research Assistant to Professor Sonia Katyal and an active member of the Women in Tech Law team, what other activities did you engage in, and how did these experiences influence your professional growth and development?

    After over four years of tackling trademark disputes and navigating the growing tide of data protection concerns, I realized I wanted more than just answers. I wanted to understand the bigger picture. I was curious not just about what the law said, but why it was evolving the way it was, especially in response to rapidly shifting technologies. 

    Berkeley felt like the perfect fit: world-renowned faculty, cutting-edge tech-law curriculum, and if the future was being built in Silicon Valley, then Berkeley Law was clearly where it was being legally translated.

    Immersing myself in this environment gave me something invaluable: perspective. Studying privacy law under experts who were helping shape legislation (rather than just interpret it) helped me move beyond the black-letter law mindset. I began to think more critically about regulatory intent, policy trade-offs, and the delicate balance between innovation and accountability.

    Courses like Social Media Law and Computer Crime Law sharpened my understanding of how existing legal frameworks are being pushed by new technologies. Learning about Hollywood contracts one day and GDPR enforcement actions the next made me see just how interconnected everything is in this space, and how important it is for lawyers to be adaptable, tech-savvy, and a little creative.

    Beyond academics, working as a Research Assistant to Professor Sonia Katyal was one of the most formative experiences of my time at Berkeley Law. Her work sits at the crossroads of technology, IP, and civil rights, and being part of a research project examining how copyright and trademark law intersect with identity and digital expression expanded my understanding of what the law can do, not just what it should do. It also refined my analytical skills, deepened my research capabilities, and taught me how to connect theory to real-world legal challenges.

    As part of varied organizations such as Women in Tech Law and journals such as Berkeley Technology Law Journal, I had the opportunity to engage in real conversations about the future of the profession. One standout moment was interviewing Professor Jennifer Urban, Chair of the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA). That conversation gave me unique insight into the inner workings of a regulatory body and offered a front-row seat to the evolution of U.S. privacy enforcement. 

    These experiences, taken together, significantly shaped my professional growth. They helped me transition from being a subject-matter practitioner to a more holistic legal thinker. They taught me to approach problems from multiple angles: technical, ethical, regulatory, and commercial. Most importantly, they reaffirmed my passion for working at the intersection of law and technology and gave me the tools and confidence to lead in this space.

    Berkeley did not just deepen my legal expertise; it expanded my entire outlook on the role lawyers can play in shaping the future. 

    As a student researcher at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California, you worked on the Digital Rights Project, focusing on policy research related to consumer data protection and compliance with California privacy laws, including the CCPA, CalOPPA, and the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. How would you compare the data protection frameworks in the U.S., India, and Europe, particularly with your certification in these areas?

    My time at the ACLU of Northern California’s Digital Rights Project offered invaluable insight into the nuanced and often fragmented landscape of U.S. privacy law. Unlike the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or India’s newly enacted Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP), both of which adopt comprehensive, centralized frameworks grounded in fundamental privacy rights, the U.S. continues to follow a sectoral and state-by-state approach, creating significant variability and complexity in compliance.

    One of the most interesting projects I worked on involved analyzing the privacy implications of QR code-based restaurant ordering systems. What initially appeared to be a straightforward user interface turned into a multi-layered compliance exercise involving the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA), and the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. It served as a powerful reminder that even the most routine consumer interactions can involve intricate legal considerations, especially when sensitive data such as payment or behavioral information is collected and stored.

    This experience strengthened my ability to assess data practices through a multi-jurisdictional, multi-sectoral lens, reinforcing the importance of understanding not just the legal frameworks involved, but also the underlying technical architecture of products and services. A lawyer’s ability to offer sound advice increasingly depends on their understanding of how data flows through systems, where risks lie, and how those risks intersect with evolving legal standards.

    A key difference I observed between U.S. privacy laws and the GDPR lies in the scope and rigor of compliance requirements. The GDPR is both strict and expansive, there is no minimum threshold for applicability. Any company, regardless of size, that collects personal data from even a single EU resident is subject to the law. It is a deeply consumer-centric regime, with limited room for flexibility.

    In contrast, while U.S. state laws like the CPRA, are also robust, they do provide some flexibility for companies, especially smaller entities and startups. Most U.S. privacy laws include applicability thresholds, based on revenue, number of consumers affected, or volume of data processed, before the obligations kick in. This approach allows smaller businesses a bit more breathing room to implement privacy compliance during their early growth stages, aligning legal obligations with business maturity. That said, it remains critical for startups to incorporate privacy-by-design from the outset, as crossing the threshold can happen sooner than anticipated. In short, the GDPR prioritizes consumer rights at every level, while U.S. laws attempt to strike a balance, offering strong consumer protections without stifling innovation and scalability.

    This comparative analysis between the EU, India, and U.S. frameworks highlighted a fundamental truth: privacy compliance is not one-size-fits-all. It demands not only legal fluency but also a contextual, practical understanding of industry, technology, and jurisdiction. This foundational experience continues to shape my approach to privacy law, grounded in strong legal analysis but always mindful of the evolving global and technological landscape.

    Being admitted to both the Indian Bar and the State Bar of California, how has your dual qualification benefited your practice? What advice would you give to aspiring legal professionals aiming to clear the California Bar Exam?

      Being dual-qualified in both India and California, two jurisdictions that are home to some of the world’s most dynamic and disruptive startups, has significantly enhanced my ability to provide cross-border legal counsel, particularly in the areas of intellectual property and data privacy. This dual qualification allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems. Where Indian law is rapidly evolving through legislative reform, California’s legal landscape is shaped by a combination of statutes and robust regulatory enforcement. Understanding these contrasts enables me to craft nuanced, business-oriented legal strategies that are tailored to the specific jurisdiction and sector.

      As for the California Bar Exam, its reputation as one of the most challenging in the U.S. is well-earned, but not insurmountable. My advice to aspiring legal professionals is straightforward: treat it like a full-time job. Success requires consistency, discipline, and a well-structured study plan. I truly believe that the exam does not test intelligence, it is more about mastering the method, developing exam endurance, and performing under pressure. If you can commit to the process fully, passing the exam is absolutely achievable.

      Ultimately, the effort is well worth it. Being admitted in California has opened up exciting opportunities to work at the intersection of law, technology, and innovation on a truly global scale.

      Throughout your distinguished career, what strategies have you employed to maintain a healthy work-life balance? What guidance would you offer to others striving to manage both professional ambitions and personal responsibilities?

      Let’s be honest, achieving work-life balance in the legal profession is often more aspiration than reality, something everyone talks about, but few actually manage to pin down. The nature of our work is demanding, high-stakes, and often time-sensitive. But over the years, I have learned that if you do not actively protect your personal life, your professional life will quietly take over every corner of it.

      One mindset shift that has served me well is this: Don’t make work your life, make it part of your life. Law is what I do; It is not all of who I am. I have come to believe that you cannot be a high-performing professional if you are constantly running on empty. As the saying goes, you can’t pour from an empty cup! 

      For me, this means setting clear boundaries where possible. I carve out non-negotiable time for things that replenish me, whether that’s exercise, travel, sports, time with family and friends, or even just reading something that has nothing to do with legal theory. I also try not to romanticize the hustle. Being available 24/7 does not make you indispensable, it often just makes you exhausted. And, let us be candid: no matter how good you are, you are replaceable to your workplace, but not to your health, your loved ones, or yourself.

      My advice to younger legal professionals is that ambition is important, but so is sustainability. If you are building a long-term career, you need to treat your time, energy, and wellbeing as strategic assets. Learn to say no. Take breaks without guilt. Celebrate small wins outside of work. And most importantly, define success on your own terms, not just by billable hours.

      At the end of the day, being a fulfilled person makes you a better lawyer!

      Get in touch with Anuja Shah –

    1. Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

      Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      Let me begin by asking you about your decision to do law after having an engineering degree or academic foundation in biotechnology and industrial microbiology. What was your inspiration in bringing intellectual property into your life, and how have you taken this approach to excel in the IP domain and make it a passion?

      As it happens with everybody, the shift to intellectual property from an engineering background, or in my case, the shift from biotechnology and industrial microbiology to IP, was not planned. It happened organically, and I began my career as a patent engineer in my first organization where I was introduced to the world of IP.

      That exposure was an eye-opener for me because I realized IP was the perfect intersection of science, law, strategy, and, more importantly, business. It allowed me to stay close to innovation while also influencing how innovations are protected and commercialized. So that is something that brought me towards IP, and the interest has kept me going to date. Over time, this technical-to-legal transition has shaped my entire approach to how I view IP.

      I don’t look at innovations in isolation. I view them as a larger part of the innovation journey because it’s all incremental and doesn’t happen as a eureka moment. That mindset continues to influence how I advise my clients even today. Whether it’s a startup or a multinational trying to scale its IP, I try to see the bigger picture of what the innovation would mean to them, how it aligns with their business goals, how to strategically protect it because IP, in isolation from business, is of no use.

      That’s how my journey towards IP keeps me motivated and going strong.

      Thank you so much for bringing in this aspect of the intersection of two fields, which are absolutely niche. Way back in 2007 itself, you started KAnalysis, and right now, you have made it a thriving IP law firm. What were some of the key challenges during those early years when you started your journey with a modest three-member team and navigated it through building a firm of this size and reputation, with a mission of making an IP hub in India? How have you done it?

      Well, it has happened gradually, I would say. When we started in 2007, we were working out of a single basement with very limited resources and zero clients. So, the initial challenge was how to show your credibility. Why would anybody trust a young firm or someone who has just started?

      We focused on quality, our responsiveness, and trust, because trust is something that takes you far. Even during our initial phase, we were doing the IP work. Wherever we were trained, we were not good at starting or setting up a business, managing cash flows, or getting clients, or getting an introduction to a client. We could execute a project, we could write a patent, we could search for prior art, or we could do a lot of things, but how to convince somebody to trust you?

      So those were tough initial days, as it happens with everybody. But the real challenge started as we grew. When you try to scale, the biggest challenge is that you should not dilute your core values. Consistency and patience are key. Over time, we have invested in people, set up robust processes, and, being from an engineering background, we could incorporate and adapt technology at various levels.

      People, process, and technology, I would say, are the three pillars we have not compromised on till now. The culture is that we will not compromise on these, however big we grow, because growth at the cost of culture and quality will not last long. Over the years, it has been almost 18 years. We have built slowly and steadily, investing in people, processes, and technology.

      That’s what I claim to be my biggest challenge now. As the team grows now, we are over a hundred people. The majority of my team is in India, but a few members are spread across the globe. The second-largest team is in the US, and we have small offices spread across the globe to take care of various jurisdictions.

      Every step has a new challenge, and as we grow, the challenges keep changing, but you have to adapt and survive.

      You have been resilient, and you have prospered through that. Keeping all that and working towards IP rights for more than 18 years now, what was the role of your engineering background in shaping the strategies that you particularly saw were different from regular lawyers? Obviously, there was a different understanding that came from having an engineering background plus a legal understanding. How have you seen that particular combination help you and your team grow and strategize at the same time?

      Yes, I have a different take on this. Whatever course or degree or exercise you take, it shapes your mind to think in a particular way. That’s what engineering does.

      Engineering doesn’t teach you anything specific. It trains your mind in a particular direction, to think a certain way, to solve issues or problems with a different bent of mind. Engineering teaches you to deconstruct a problem, break down the system into fundamental parts, look at each part individually, and then see their function and assimilate them.

      Law, on the other hand, teaches you to analyze. Law teaches you to connect those individual parts in a logical and legal framework. So, having training in both aspects helps you see the final picture without missing the finer details. That’s what the combination of engineering and law helps you achieve.

      Initially, I was more involved in patent prosecution. Over time, I was exposed to IP litigation, which has added a third dimension to my thinking. When you are prosecuting patents, your basic idea is to get a patent. When you go into litigation, you realize the basic idea is how to get a patent that is enforceable.

      It teaches you what holds in court and what falls apart. This practical insight sharpens my instincts in the entire scheme of things. Now I try to look for the best claim scope or how to draft better claims. As a litigator, I have realized that my ability to draft and interpret claims has also improved.

      Claims should be broad enough, assertable, and defendable even under attack. All those things shape your thinking. Every day is a learning process. Every case teaches you something. So whether I’m guiding someone, I’m not just focused on getting the examination and obtaining a patent, but also on how much I can contribute to obtaining an enforceable patent. My goal is to create IP that is not just strong on paper.

      It should withstand scrutiny. It should attract investors. It should survive litigation, both offensive and defensive, and it should support the business in market entry. Starting and setting up my business also helps me understand the key challenges any company faces with regard to IP protection.

      You don’t go all out and spend all your money on IP. Business is also important. It’s a combination and a learning that has helped me consult clients. I don’t work with clients as just a service provider or as a lawyer. I work hand in glove, even suggesting who they should go to for a merger or whom they should not partner with. I regularly undertake those kinds of activities.

      That’s why I like working with early-stage startups or small tech companies, because there you can be very closely invested. Over time, I’ve seen most of my clients trust me because we make them understand that IP isn’t just about legal protection. It’s a business asset.

      So technical understanding, legal foresight, and business acumen that’s why we have been successful as KAnalysis, I would say. I’ve seen my clients from their first provisional patent to securing multimillion-dollar funding. Those have been brilliant experiences.

      We would also love to understand that particular monetization process and the multimillion-dollar deals that you have done for IP monetization especially.

      But before that, we would love to ask you about your pro bono work also, where you have invested a lot of your time in initiatives like the IP Help Desk for startups and the IP workshops that you keep on doing. What actually fuels your dedication to promoting IP awareness and educating academicians and entrepreneurial communities related to this? Because you do it pro bono and you are also involved in a lot of deals which are for monetization. So how do you find the balance between these two, and how do you find time to do that?

      That’s interesting! I’ll tell you a very humorous anecdote. When I joined IP, it was very difficult to convince my dad what I was doing. And he is a professor. So that is the level of IP awareness in India. It took me a long while because India has no dearth of innovation, but IP awareness and awareness around IP rights remain uneven. Startups, academic institutions, and big companies have their setup because they have realized it the hard way.

      They have been sued or they want to protect, so they have mechanisms. But startups and academia lack IP awareness. Over the years, I have been working and managing one of the largest patent portfolios in India. We are managing portfolios in over 80 countries, spanning over 30,000 patents.

      So, handling that kind of a portfolio, I realized that most of my clients are from outside India. During COVID, you get time to ponder a lot about what we are doing and what we are giving back to society. During those days, I realized, let’s start an IP help desk to help startups, because startups are in the most gullible phase. I have seen investors who are real sharks take over their hard-earned innovation and everything. So I launched the IP help desk just to help them understand their questions, their issues, and guide them or handhold them without charging them. Because initially, they’re short on money and they think everybody is trying to sell something.

      I have done over 150 pro bono workshops across the country in the last two and a half years. These are not just lectures; they’re conversations where I help to demystify IP to the founders, to the people at incubation centers, those who have just started, and I give them practical, usable advice.

      How to stagger the cost. How you can protect yourself with minimum cost. So that when you attract investors, you may pay me but how can we get to that stage where you are attractive to the investor and protected. Because IP should not be an afterthought. It should be part of the innovation process from day one.

      Founders and researchers need to understand their rights and the value of protection. That’s what I do. I try to make them understand where the value lies. It’s not a cost center, it’s an asset. Slowly and gradually, I’m assisting over 1,000 startups at the moment, who are transforming in their trust in me, their confidence, and their outlook. For me, this is a way of giving back to the ecosystem, because ultimately this ecosystem has shaped me, and I ensure that the next generation has all the tools to compete globally. Because Indians should be competing globally. Big companies or multinationals will not build India. It will be the SME sector that writes the next India growth story.

      So that’s what my mission is to enable startups to lead the India story. Whatever little I can contribute, I try to contribute.

      That’s not little, that’s huge. One person can bring in so much change and can bring in so many people together to work towards one goal of making India again an IP hub as you have envisioned for everyone.

      Yeah, that’s why I keep my Fridays open for four hours. Anybody can book a slot and they can ask questions, without any charges. So that’s something that attracts most people.

      Wow! We would love to promote that aspect. And we’ll definitely talk about this the Fridays that you keep open for people to come to you and have that free consultation. That’s something which is not easily available, at least from such senior attorneys who are already managing such big portfolios.

      This is something that is very inspiring for young professionals also. So, sir, how would you like to talk about the intersection of science, innovation, and law, and what kind of core skills these young professionals can seek when they’re trying or thinking of building a career? And what do you propose to build that particular mindset, and what kind of advice would you like to give to them so that they can thrive in this particular field of intellectual property, keeping in mind that they also have to give back to society, as you already are doing?

      For anybody to give back to society, they should first focus on building their career and themselves. And they should enjoy IP, because this is a field where, if you don’t enjoy it, you cannot work a single day. That joy, that kick you don’t have to drag yourself to the office any day. You just look forward to it. And for that, the basics for students or young professionals is that you should develop interdisciplinary fluency.

      You should have a passion for science, an understanding of law, and an ability to look at business so that you are able to connect the dots. That’s something I always suggest. It’s not about mastering one thing. You have to be a jack of all trades. You have to be good at multiple things, because if you go in one direction if you are very good at law, IP is not for you. That’s the core legal side. If you’re good at engineering, IP is not for you either.

      You should have a flair for multiple things. That’s what IP requires. You should also cultivate a habit of deep listening, because the majority of my clients describe symptoms, not problems. My job is to diagnose both.

      They would just give me a situation where they’re stuck. That’s just a symptom. The real problem lies somewhere else. I need to identify what the root problem is and then provide a solution. Somebody has sued them filing a countersuit is not always the solution. There is also room for arbitration.

      If my case is not very strong, I would look for other avenues where I could bring the other party to the negotiating table. So that’s all part of business strategy. Secondly, I would advise the young generation to stay curious, because IP is evolving rapidly, especially with areas like AI, genomics, cleantech, and the majority of the new avenues that are coming.

      If you are not curious, if you are not rigorously reading, it’ll be very difficult to stay updated. This field needs you to be relevant. And finally, last but not the least be ethical. Cutting corners is not going to help you survive long in this field. This field is built on trust. So if you try to cut corners, you might get one or two clients, or you might get one or two cases, which would be shortcuts.

      But integrity will help you build a career. That’s a must. This field rewards only those who are sharp and sensitive. It’s not something you should be ruthless about. Those who can think like a scientist, act like a lawyer, and listen like a consultant. I always say to anybody who is hired that you should have good listening skills, but you should act like a lawyer and think like a scientist.

      That’s what an IP lawyer should be. It’s not a one-dimensional career, I would say. I have been actively mentoring our juniors to understand what I call IP fluency. It’s the ability to connect innovation, law, and commercial relevance. Because there is a brilliant invention that somebody has done, most of the inventors are very passionate about what they have created.

      But is it packaged enough to be marketable as a product? An IP lawyer would stop before that. I go that extra step. How would the market perceive this? What would be the best sales strategy? If you could associate your product with some bigger brand, how would this complement?

      So, those kinds of strategies I come up with because I try to help the business grow rather than just limiting myself to the IP side. So if you are someone who is curious, ethical, and eager to make an impact, IP is the career for you. It’s a very fulfilling career path. But choosing wisely is what I suggest.

      We also have one very good initiative in our organization where we have weekly training sessions for everybody. Whatever is there, they are given specific topics to present to the entire organization. Every fortnight, we have sessions so they get to dive deeper into that particular topic. That is something I have been doing regularly in this organization, because for me, it’s all about the culture that we build. We are here to nurture, and that’s what we have been doing.

      So I’ll start with “curiosity is the key, thinking like a scientist, acting like a lawyer.” Sir, keeping all that in mind, how have you developed this culture inside your organization and made sure that everyone is aligned with the whole process? Because it’s a huge organization.

      It’s in several jurisdictions as well. So the kind of thought process that’s involved also requires an understanding of having very good mental health as well as physical health. How have you worked on that and made sure that all your team members are not only aligned but also following the certain protocols that you may have set? Because it has become a very big and growing issue of mental health problems and compromised physical health and people have started talking about it. So how do you work around that and make sure that you also stay healthy and that your team across the globe is also equally healthy?

      It’s definitely a journey. I would say I’ve been trying hard to maintain a balance, but yes, it’s still a learning curve. I used to equate longer hours with better outcomes.

      That was earlier. Over time, I have realized or with experience, I could do things much quicker and I have realized that clear thinking, a strategic approach, and, I would say, strong leadership all combine to form a structure that helps you remain fit. By fit, I mean mental health more, because lawyers get involved in a case so much that they’re not able to shut down when they’re not working.

      Even in the subconscious mind, a case keeps on going. When you are so involved, a setback in court would ruin your evening, which shouldn’t be.

      So a lot of times it happens, but now I take time and ensure that I switch off. I listen to music, go for walks, or the best I like is speaking to young professionals that helps me unwind.

      And I have a supporting family. I have a very close group of friends. I have kids who help me relax, and that’s how I keep my mental balance. I would say they help me recharge, especially when things get intense and it happens almost every week. So that’s how it is.

      Delegation of work and another important point that I forgot worth mentioning, is building a strong second line. Because as the firm grows, you need to have a second line that takes care of the majority of my issues so that I come into the picture at a very later stage.

      That helps me go out and work daily because prioritizing mental health is not just about myself, but it’s all across the firm. Because if you are not sustainable, it’ll not last long. You’ll burn out.

      So we need to keep that flame alive but that flame should not burn you is what I always tell people. You stay motivated, but at least learn to enjoy, and that enjoyment should come.

      I’m very fortunate to have a set of friends who keep me grounded. They don’t let me fly too long. So that’s how I relax and unwind. And I’m still learning. Scaling means having trust in your second line, having trust in your delegation, having trust in your processes and culture. I’m very thankful that I have built a very good team. It’s a slow and steady process.

      Every hiring goes through a lot of vetting.

      I’m personally involved in most of the hirings that happen in the company because the culture should be intact. The mindset you can teach a person but you can’t change the attitude. So that is one thing I always, always look for in people. Somebody who has not played any sport would not be a good team player, is what I feel.

      So these are small, small things that I keep in mind when I look for people while hiring. I like to speak to them for an hour or so to understand and pick up some things from their mind. That person might be a brilliant asset, but if it’s not a fit for the culture, then he’s not the person for me.

      Amazing views, sir. Thank you so much for talking about building a very strong second line as well as delegating your work obviously with diligence and with the understanding that it’ll work after you have delegated.

      Sir, while you were talking about IP rights and IP management and other aspects of intellectual property, you also talked about negotiations and management. We would like to ask you your thoughts about the arbitrations that keep happening in intellectual property. How do you see the future of IP arbitration in India and globally as well? Because you have a global presence.

      I have been involved in several IP transactions as well, and over time I realized that your biggest competitors could be your potential collaborators in the future. This is a big jigsaw puzzle. Every piece needs to fit in somewhere, and that is something where there is always room for negotiation, because nobody is outrightly against anybody.

      It’s that everybody is protecting their own business interests. So in the broader sense, what we do is we try, as I mentioned earlier, to deconstruct the dispute. What is the major negotiating point? What is a strict no-go?

      Is there any chance where a financial negotiation could also take place?

      Because initially, I was also involved in a lot of IP valuation work as well. So, if there is a dollar value attributed to this particular piece of technology, could there be a royalty scope wherein we could have a negotiation around that?

      Arbitration is not always about having a mandatory step, because these days, courts have been constantly pushing for arbitration, and people should first try out arbitration before starting the trial.

      But arbitration as a first step needs to be taken care of. The real challenge I feel in India is that there are not enough trained arbitrators. Arbitration is a very, very specialized niche that is going to be very lucrative. There is very little expertise in that particular domain.

      Because an arbitrator who specializes in aerospace would not be a good fit for e-commerce.

      So for somebody who is a domain-specific arbitrator it has been a wonderful experience working with some very good arbitrators trained in Singapore or Dubai.

      Because those two centers I really like the framework they have: the training of arbitrators, the certification courses they offer.

      It’s amazing. I have had the fortune of working with quite a few of them, and I wish India had that kind of setup, where we have training schools for arbitrators where there is a specific coursework, six months or eight months, wherein arbitrators are trained to arbitrate. Because most of the time, we have our own biases, and arbitrators shouldn’t be biased.

      So those are small, small things that arbitrators need to inculcate. With training and proper guidance from established institutes across the globe, India can be a major hub because that would lead to a reduction in a lot of the backlog we have in courts, if there is a good arbitration mechanism.

      In IP, I would say it’s very laughable that most of the businesses 500, 600 crore businesses were started by a family. When they split, they don’t have a proper agreement about IPR or brands, and that fight goes on.

      Those family businesses I’ve been involved in a lot of feuds in family businesses where the brand, who owns the brand later, is a real nightmare, because many people don’t understand the value of the brand unless they see that they can’t sell using that brand. Then the valuation starts.

      So it’s still in a very, very nascent stage in India.

      But I am very hopeful that the next crop would be more accustomed to and more inclined towards alternate dispute resolution mechanisms.

      Sir, with the kind of experience and exposure you’re offering through your workshops, I truly hope many others follow your lead so that India can become the IP hub you’ve envisioned. As we come to the end of this conversation, I’d love to understand how you keep yourself updated with everything happening in the IP world. How much do you read, how often do you interact with the international community, and what differences have you observed in the understanding of IP rights across jurisdictions? Since you’ve worked in over 80 jurisdictions, you must have encountered varied approaches to the same IP concepts. It would be great if you could share those insights for the benefit of young professionals.

      Definitely. Because IP is a global thing. It’s not restrained. You need protection in multiple countries, but each country has a different law that we should understand. Each country has a different patentability criterion.

      Some things are patentable here, some things are not patentable here. Method patents are patentable in some countries, some countries only allow system claims. So this kind of thing, where you are seeking global protection if you don’t have a bird’s eye view of different jurisdictions that are patentable in Japan might not be patentable here in India. Or let’s say there is a business method patent, which is allowed in the US but not allowed in India. Software patents we face a lot of issues regarding Section 3D or repurposing of drugs. So all those things you need to work with attorneys across multiple jurisdictions to understand.

      If you are starting with a PCT application, my team has been trained with US attorneys, European attorneys, Canadian attorneys, even Japanese and Chinese attorneys. So when we write a PCT, you have room to amend in that specific jurisdiction when you enter that.

      When you are trying to prosecute applications across the globe if you are working here most people would go and help you to submit with a foreign attorney without giving you the legal perspective. Let’s say if you file in the US with 20 claims.

      Same application if you go to Europe why go with 20 claims if you have to pay an additional claim fee for five extra claims? Because above 15, Europe charges. In China, it charges above 10. Some people I have encountered in the past it’s against my profession but I would say that just to justify the billing of $20,000, they write a 200-page patent.

      That invention was brilliant and beautiful, and it should have been protected across the globe. But the translation cost was so high that the client could not afford to file in non-English jurisdictions. Only nine or ten countries allow you to file in English. The rest all require local language. You get the translation done.

      Why write a textbook when you are writing a patent? Be concise, be compliant, and think about the business of the client rather than your billing is what I always suggest. So having a global perspective with regard to global filings has been the hallmark of our success because our patents get prosecuted in multiple jurisdictions, and we are the ones who are responsible for all the jurisdictions.

      We would not say that we have drafted as per Indian law and the rest you take care of with your local attorneys. Then you keep on having office action after office action after office action, and you end up spending a lot without getting the patent because it was written in such a manner that there is very little room to go ahead.

      I’ll tell you, these days I’m facing a lot of issues with Indian companies, I would say. They cut corners while drafting a patent. They come to us for making a response for a US office action. After our response, the claims are allowed, but the final objection comes that there is no support for those claims in the specification.

      You can amend the claims, but you can’t amend the specification. A brilliant innovation goes down the drain because you have already disclosed most of the things. There are remedies that we suggest, but you end up having your cost at least 1.5 to 1.8 times. You try to save a few dollars and you end up spending a fortune. So that’s something that needs to be told to the people and to the business community that it’s always a penny-wise and pound-foolish situation.

      That is the kind of situation that most Indian businesses are facing these days.

      And as you mentioned at the start, they don’t want to pay. They will pay. They’ll pay when they are in a soup. Why get in a soup? Have preventive strategies first. That’s my advice.

      Why get into a suing battle later when paying upfront can keep you protected for life? I’d really like to understand your thoughts and motivation. How do you envision the IP hub idea becoming a reality in India over the next decade, especially considering the high-profile cases you’ve handled and the challenges you’ve seen businesses face? Since you’re mentoring so many attorneys, startups, and businesses, what would your advice or strategy be to help make this vision real, especially with the government also actively working towards IP awareness? How can both young professionals and seasoned attorneys contribute to this goal?

      I would say that we need to shift our mindset from domestic-first to a global situation. It should be global by design. Most of the people file PCT applications, and I have seen people who say that they have got a worldwide patent.

      So that’s the level of awareness they have. And they don’t enter the national phase, and everything goes down the drain.

      So if you start with a global perspective, then only you’ll be able to compete globally. That’s why KAnalysis started. We came up with the idea everybody laughed at us that how can you manage through a single window so many jurisdictions?

      Step by step, step by step, the team got trained. We got trained in understanding different countries, different jurisdictions, what kind of objections each country has. We have built strategies where you could save at least 40% of your cost if you plan your prosecution and global IP filing strategically. Minimum 40% saving that we have shown repeatedly again and again.

      That’s a huge amount of money considering you are looking at 8 to 10 jurisdictions to file. Of course, India has made commendable strides. It’s not that India has not done anything. At that time, there was no digital filing when I started. Now it’s all digital.

      Expedited examination is a very welcome step that we have. They have increased outreach programs, which is very good. They have stakeholders’ meetings that is a very welcome step.

      The major problem that I see is inconsistency in the examination of patents. Delay has been something that I have always been seeing, but now at least with expedited examinations and all, I’ve been able to get patents within a year, many times.

      So those are some things that have certainly helped. Just like USPTO, the Indian Patent Office needs to adapt to AI for basic things. You can’t replace humans, but at least the formalities checks and all those things could be automated. USPTO has automated all those things.

      That would help us get a better outcome, faster outcome, and reduce the delay in enforcement.

      I empathize with the judiciary because they have a huge backlog, but the Indian system legal reform is the need of the hour. If you want to be business-friendly, you need to have fast-track courts. IP divisions here in two high courts is a very welcome step. It’s really, really helpful. But we need to have more dedicated IP courts across the country.

      IP should be the prime focus of the country. Because if you want to become a so-called Vishwa Guru, then you need to focus on IP. If you don’t do that, you’ll not be a business-friendly jurisdiction. You’ll just be a center for cheap labor, and your manufacturing will move somewhere else because they will be cheaper than you.

      Unless you innovate, unless you try to remain attractive to innovation, unless you create an ecosystem for innovation you’ll just remain like that.

      We have seen examples. Malaysia was one such country which could not innovate. It rose very fast, and then stagnated and phased out. They were calling it the next bright spot.

      Innovation sustains. The US hardly makes anything. They innovate. So innovation needs to be nurtured.

      And at the very grassroots levels, school curriculum should have at least a course on IPR. I tell my kids a very fascinating story. They were making some paintings at home, so I told them to always sign your painting.

      Otherwise, somebody else would take the credit. That’s IPR.

      So that’s something we need to inculcate and create right from the initial days that anything you create, it’s your intellectual property.

      And think beyond. And our education system also needs an overhaul where we have relevant courses that are more aligned with industry requirements.

      That is something I look forward to with this government. Let’s see how much they do.

       Thank you, sir, for being here and for your incredible dedication to intellectual property. It’s rare to see someone live and breathe IP the way you do. We truly appreciate you taking the time to share your insights on IP rights, monetization, valuation, and so much more. Your passion is inspiring, and we hope it drives India closer to becoming a global IP hub.

      One thing I would like to add in the end.

      We should learn to celebrate innovators like we celebrate a lot of things.

      We should have a national program to celebrate innovators. That would be really an encouraging sign for anybody to innovate.

      Get in touch with Nilanshu Shekhar –

    2. Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

      Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      I will start backwards. I’ll not start with the very first question, why you chose law, but I would request you to answer first why and when you decided to start Juris Summit, what was the reason that you started it so soon? What are your plans? How are you going to work on the cross border business laws, and what do you see and where do you see yourself and Juris Summit in next, let’s say five years and a decade?

      I’m so thankful and grateful for all of the SuperLawyer team for bringing this opportunity to me. And yes, I’m looking forward to collaborating with you people and also to giving guidance to all the newcomers who are wishing and willing to start their career on an international platform.

      So, yeah, you know, there are some things, like we said, we get it out of WhatsApp chat.

      So me and my partner Sohan, we met in a WhatsApp group, like in a freelancer group, and at that time, back after two years, we had started our individual freelancing journey. So, we individually found that startups, they struggle, particularly startups, they struggle a lot because there are two things.

      First thing is, particularly I’m talking about the US startups. The United States law firms charge a lot. I would say 800 dollars per hour, and even beyond that. So I was like, what is this? Why are they charging this much?

      Of course, they provide services and they do everything that needs to be done, but we also are authorized to do that, and we can also do it at a lesser price. So that was the first point. And the second point, startups, they want everything fast. They approach any lawyer or somewhere that gives us a template, we will do it ourselves. And in that template, the alignment of business, the clauses, they’re not properly as per their business. They’re not aligned with their business.

      So these are the two things which I felt that I needed to bridge a gap between this thing. So at that time, I had a talk with Sohan. Sohan, this is the problem, we need to fill it out. So he said, so let’s go, let’s build an agency. Then let’s work together.

      And I said, yeah, let’s do it. Why not? And then without a second thought, it was just like bam! Out of a WhatsApp chat. We set up an agency.

      Amazing journey. Amazing start. So let’s now get back to the basics. How did you become convinced that you have to do law as well as company secretaryship?

      And with this kind of dual qualification, how did you pave your way towards not only being an Indian lawyer, but also a lawyer who’s internationally acclaimed and who has moved to Germany and is working from there?

      So, the thing is, I wanted to become a chartered accountant firstly, so I started my journey back then. I’ve cleared my CPT, and after that I could not understand what was happening, but suddenly in that period of time, my interest was very much into law. Then I thought of the professional course of company secretary, and without second thought, again, I enrolled myself into company secretary and successfully I’ve completed everything in the first attempt. And side by side, as this is a law field, I also enrolled myself for an LLB course, a three years course. So I’ve also completed my LLB, and fortunately in the last year of LLB I topped the university, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University.

      So, this is how I wanted to prepare myself fully, and after all these things were done, still I felt like something was missing. Then I found courses like US corporate laws, then diploma in international business laws.

      And that thing fascinated me. I said I want to do this. I want to set up a remote practice for myself. I wanted to do this thing. So without a second thought, I enrolled myself. And today I’m here so that I can work from Germany with US law firms, and not only US, all over the world, I can work with every country’s client.

      So, with all these things, which you decide on a first go, what kind of experience do you have of the transition that you have done from traditional legal practice to starting, founding and running a specialized legal agency, which is right now catering mostly to international clients, particularly in US, like you already have explained about startups. How is your experience about the agency and how does it work for you and your partner and the kind of challenges that you see in having Indian laws, having international laws and their comparison? How does that work for you?

      I would start with the traditional law firms in India or wherever we can say. So, at the law firm I had access to a predictable environment, and consistent staff support was there. Then we had a particular library where we can read and where we can update ourselves. But mostly there were domestic clients, and there were Indian timelines, as you must be aware of, then billing expectations. And so all these things were somewhere I feel they’re keeping me down, they’re setting up boundaries for me.

      So, when I started a legal agency, these were not the things. There were, obviously, challenges because time zone and communication are the biggest challenges when we start an agency that is hundred percent remote and which deals with international clients.

      So, we have staff, obviously we have staff, and what we do is someone between us is always awake at US time zone so that we can grab all the opportunities, so that we can reply to all the clients. And even if he’s not there, what do we do, because we use technology, right?

      We have to use technology. We set auto replies to that particular person. In that way, we don’t push the client, we can’t talk right now, and it’s not our time zone. This is how we work.

      So even if there is any urgent matter or something  because we see clients that want something within 24 hours, within a few hours we actually do that. We don’t say we can’t do this. This is not a timeline to deliver everything, nothing like that. We’ll do everything.

      Someone from us will have to do that. And we have set our agency like that only. So these are the challenges: timeline and communication.

      So, talking about communication, recently we had a client from Saudi Arabia, and I personally had to deal with him.

      So, the first time I didn’t understand what he’s talking about, his accent was so difficult to understand. But thanks to the notes we take, whenever we start a meeting, on the other end we start taking notes. So thanks to all these things, thanks to technology, we understand these things.

      So these are the challenges we overcome, and that’s how it works.

       This shows that the kind of work that you are doing is getting more and more  reach, and that is something which is the value addition to your work at Juris Summit.  So the kind of driving force that you, your partners and the people who work with you have, what kind of gaps or insufficiencies or legal issues you have seen in US business laws as compared to Indian business laws? And the kind of observation that has helped you overcome those challenges and help US companies or businesses have their legal work done with you.

      Okay, so, I mentioned this before, that for billing, the US firms charge a lot. So this is the first thing that we wanted to fill the gap  to provide services at a lower price than the US law firms.

      The second thing, obviously, about the DIY route you know, templates from online platforms and Reddit forums they get. So these are the gaps Juris Summit set out to fill. We offer a third party responsive, startup-savvy legal support delivered by us. Like we are experienced, we have an experienced team and at a cost that makes sense for early-stage companies.

      I’m talking particularly here about the early stage because businesses which are already set, normally, they don’t hesitate or they don’t struggle this much. So, we focus on flat fees. Not an hourly basis. There’s no surprising billings and nothing like that. Scope-defined engagements and what we call it legal sprints.

      So, founders know exactly what they are paying for. So for example, what if there is a review document with us, we have to review that document, we make sure we provide another document  that we just don’t review it and tell him that these are the findings and these are the loopholes that we need to fill.

      And these are the liability clauses and everything. Not like that. What we suggest from the very first clause, to try to make him understand in a simple language. We make a document and we write it in a simple language, clause to clause, that you should know what you are signing. So this is our approach  to make him understand everything.

      We speak their language in short, I can say we speak their language. We don’t just recite, deliver code or GDPR clauses, we explain what it means for their product, their fundraising, or any contractor agreement. So this is how we work.

      And Juris Summit is all about delivering clarity, speed, strategy at the point where founders need it most. We don’t just drop documents, we help build legally sound businesses one decision at a time. And that’s the gap we saw and the reason we are here.

       So on that note, how do you guys keep yourself updated with the new changes in laws in different jurisdictions. Not only the US, like you just now said that you dealt with a client from Saudi Arabia, then other jurisdictions also. So what is your way of keeping yourself updated and keeping your team updated as well?

       So, what happens is normally when we start our day, normally, we start our day at 9:00 AM. 

      So for the first half hour, particularly of mine, I look for all the US jurisdictions, the updates and everything.  There are many newsletters which I have subscribed to.  Then I also have many attorneys. Like we have a group with US attorneys to get the updates. Hey, what’s going on? What’s new? We talk normally like that. So  I get updates from them. And on the other hand, Sohan, he handles Indian jurisdiction, all the Indian and Asian. So basically our first hour or half an hour is only to update ourselves with all the knowledge.

      And apart from this, what we do is set a meeting every 15 days or weekly, biweekly. And, we exchange each other’s knowledge. Hey, what’s new? What did you see? What did you see in the last 15 days? Please share with us what’s up? And everything is online, so we keep a very friendly manner, very relaxed atmosphere, everyone shares his or her thoughts. So like that we exchange our thoughts and we keep updated.

       Are there any specific reading materials or any channel which you especially look out for? Because there are so many of them. If you could name a few, it would be very helpful for the learners as well.

      There are many channels, newsletters. See, it depends upon the learner, how they find it, how easy it is to get the knowledge from that particular newsletter or particular journal or everything.

      So it depends upon the learner, there are many. If you Google it, you will find it. And there are many AIs. Research tools or even if you go to LexisNexis or Westlaw websites. These are the websites where you get all the knowledge.

      Even if you type, what’s the update here tonight? If you even Google it, you’ll get an idea. You will get a list thoroughly. So not a particular channel or anything I follow, but it depends upon, what exactly I want to see on that particular day, that’s how I Google it. And there are a number of websites and journals and everything.

       So let’s move ahead and understand how you help the startups and SMEs, especially those that are led by non-US founders,  but they are being navigated by US federal laws or state laws. How do you make sure that you explain those things, especially tax compliance and other overwhelming aspects of law to your client and make sure that it has been taken care while you help their startup being established in us from scratch until the time they need your help.

       Yeah, as you mentioned that US Federal and tax compliance may be overwhelming and to simplify this is our job, so we simplify US federal and state tax compliances for non-US founders by removing the overwhelm and breaking everything into clear and actionable steps. So for example, we begin with a founder friendly roadmap.  We draft a simple PDF, a simple agreement or like an information document and that outlines all the key tax obligations across federal or state levels.  So this includes important filings like the EIN, then form 5472 then franchise tax and sales tax registration with its timeline and responsible parties that is clearly indicated in that particular document. So since we don’t use a client portal, we ensure accessibility and clarity by sharing checklists and guides over email and tools like Google Drive, we use that. So, you know, founders can track their progress step by step.

       We provide all necessary templates where it’s 83 B, election letter or a sales tax exemption certificate with instruction return in plain English. This is how we manage it. And for ongoing compliances as well, we partner with experienced CPAs.

      Like we have many CPAs in our touch and bookkeepers who specialize in cross-border entities. So this is how we provide all the information to them.  And once introduced, we stay in loop to ensure filings are accurate, then deadlines are met. And the startup stays in solid ground.

      So, as I mentioned earlier, our goal is very simple. Remove all the complexities, bring structure to compliances and let non-US founders focus on building and remove that overwhelmingness.

      How do you manage your physical and mental health while you are doing all of this in different timelines?

      Because obviously sitting in one timeline and working. But managing different timelines, having that presence all the time, that all 24 hours we are available for clients. How do you manage that particular aspect of your life where you have to take care of your physical health as well as your mental health?

      Yeah, start your day with meditation. And hitting a gym, that thing keeps me going all day because, as you have also already mentioned, I have to keep aligned with every time zone and everything. So obviously, this is hectic, this is not easy. But if you manage things properly, it’s all about time management.

      We can’t say we don’t have time, we can’t say that. We have to manage the time, and then we’ll have time automatically. And for my mental health, I walk a lot. It gives me clarity when I walk. It clears my mind. Take a walk in nature for, let’s say, 15 to 20, even 20 minutes, just one round or something.

      It’ll help you boost your thinking and give clarity on what you are doing. And after every two hours, take a break of 10 minutes. It’ll boost your productivity, we would say. So we have to manage. I don’t say no to anything.

      I say I can do it. So there is nothing that you can’t do, I feel. You have to do it. If you decide, there will be a way. You will have to find a way and you can do it.

       You can do everything with an amazing understanding and the way you are doing it, may you have all the success that you have planned for yourself. It’s an amazing experience to understand how you have gone so far, just by the sheer willpower of being able to do anything and everything under the sun.

       It’s an overwhelming thought as well that you carry forward yourself with the thought of being able to do it.

       One more thing. It’s not easy to keep motivated and to stay positive all the time. Because there were times in my life as well where  I started this freelancing journey, there were times where I didn’t get clients. I had to struggle. But the thing is we have to keep going without giving up.

      This is the mantra. Don’t give up. Stand back. There will be your time.  You can’t give up. That’s it. You can’t give up. You have to keep putting in the hard work.

      Get in touch with Priyanka Mandhani –

    3. “In my view, not every conflict calls for the rigours of litigation, many can be effectively  resolved through dialogue and a planned, structured settlement process.” – Ankita Sarangi, Advocate-on-Record and  IMI Accredited Mediator.

      “In my view, not every conflict calls for the rigours of litigation, many can be effectively  resolved through dialogue and a planned, structured settlement process.” – Ankita Sarangi, Advocate-on-Record and  IMI Accredited Mediator.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      Looking back at your formative years and legal education, what early experiences  shaped your perspective towards law and inspired you to pursue a career in  litigation and dispute resolution? 

      Born and brought up in Delhi, I completed my schooling at DPS RK Puram, studying  from nursery to 12th grade, with the initial years up to Class 5 spent in the junior wing  of the school. 

      I belong to the pre-CLAT era, when each law school conducted its own entrance  examination. At that time, choosing a college also meant carefully evaluating both its  location and the professional opportunities that followed. I had intentionally decided  against taking multiple entrance exams, but a trusted recommendation persuaded me to  attempt the entrance for the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS).  I was later formally informed that I had successfully cleared the entrance exam and was  eligible to secure admission to NUALS. However, after passing the entrance exam for  Indraprastha University (Amity Law School), I chose to enrol there, as its location in  Delhi-NCR and its ranking in the top ten law colleges in India, were rather significant  factors in my decision at the time. 

      My decision was primarily driven by the fact that Delhi provided a far more conducive  environment for pursuing a career in law, particularly in litigation, which was my area  of interest. However, with the benefit of hindsight, I now believe that institutional  rankings are of limited consequence in the long run, especially for those committed to  a career in litigation since law is a profession that transcends classroom learning and genuine mastery can only be forged through practical application and real-world experience. 

      While the school provided a solid platform, it was the inspiration I drew from my  parents, both of whom had worked with the government and were highly accomplished from an early age, that set a high benchmark for me and encouraged me to take my  academics seriously while also pursuing co-curricular activities such as debates and  beyond. I was always drawn to writing and was made aware that I had a natural ease with language. Outside the school curriculum, I found joy in exploring a variety of non  fiction books and articles, driven by a curiosity to better understand how the world  works. I was particularly drawn to topics in psychology and neuroscience, which still continue to captivate me. I believe this reading has also quietly shaped me in becoming more empathetic, a quality that proves valuable particularly in mediation. I’ve always  found satisfaction in tackling problems and working toward practical solutions, and was  grateful that others felt comfortable seeking my advice. Through helping them resolve  personal conflicts and find common ground, I developed a sincere interest in  Alternative Dispute Resolution. 

      During my academic years, I remained actively engaged in co-curricular activities,  including parliamentary debates, Model United Nations, coupled with several extra  curricular such as taking part in inter-school competitions, winning as a solo singer in  important music competitions as well as inter school level athletics which I believe does give one confidence and discipline while also encouraging prompt, judicious thinking  under pressure, and embrace competition. In my opinion, extra-curricular and co-curricular activities teach early on that winning and losing are both part of the game,  something I came to appreciate through sports and other competitions in these formative years, and which continues to shape my approach as a lawyer. 

      During your time at Law School, you undertook intensive internships with leading  law firms, arbitration centres, and the offices of Additional Solicitor General. How  were they transformative, and how did they influence your career path?

      Internships were not mandatory for students at that time, unlike the current practice in  most colleges, following the BCI notification. The primary reason to pursue them for  me, was to gain exposure to the profession at an early stage. I was very keen on  exploring a wide range of laws, including unconventional areas such as Sports Law and  TDSAT matters, which were not commonly taken up. I enjoyed the process of securing  internships through my own effort which has also helped me become independent. I  actively went for interviews, followed up with offices, and treated the process as a  learning experience in itself. Alongside this, I also participated in many inter-college  and intra-college moot court competitions as a speaker and was fortunate to secure good  positions and awards. After graduating, I have been invited to judge college moot  courts, which often reminds me of my own time as a speaker and participant, recalling  the long hours and sometimes several months of preparation that went into each round.

      One experience from the internship days that stands out for me is when I wanted to  intern with the office of an ex-ASG, which was very coveted, and very few students  would get selected or allowed to intern at the office at a time. I pursued the application  consistently, without using any references, and was ultimately offered the chance to  intern. When he later realized that my family was acquainted with him, he asked why I  had gone through the entire process, but for me, the satisfaction lay in doing it  independently. Similarly, I secured internships at several law firms and at DIAC (at the  time known as Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre), again through persistent  applications and interviews. At DIAC, I gained early exposure to institutional  arbitration and was introduced to how such proceedings are conducted in practice. 

      It’s worth mentioning that all my internships, except one, were unpaid and I never had  any reservations about that. It was generally understood that internships were about  learning rather than stipends; payment, if offered, was considered a bonus, not an  entitlement. The one exception was at a law firm where, at the time of joining, I was  clearly informed that I would be paid a fixed amount for the duration. If an internship  is undertaken mainly or solely for financial reasons, it is important that this be  communicated at the outset, since paid internships carry a very different set of  expectations. Raising monetary demands midway is neither fair to the seniors nor  consistent with professional conduct. Any agreement regarding payment should,  therefore, be clearly confirmed in writing, preferably over mail. 

      Each firm I interned with also gave me insights into its specialized practice areas, which helped me appreciate the finer aspects of the profession and further helped me  develop a sense of independence very early on. I believe internships are extremely  important for law students, as they offer a practical glimpse into what lies ahead after  law school. During my internship, I often worked long hours, staying back even after  the associates had left to complete the work they had assigned, often under strict  deadlines, and was usually among the first to arrive each morning, not with the intention  of being absorbed in the firms, but simply to absorb as much as possible and maximize  the learning experience.

      You began your professional journey assisting the Additional Solicitor General at  the Delhi High Court, where you were exposed to high-profile government  litigation at a very early stage. Soon after, you worked with an Advocate-on Record at the Supreme Court. Looking back, what lessons did you draw from  these formative experiences, and how did they shape your understanding of  appellate practice and prepare you for eventually qualifying as an AOR yourself? 

      Immediately after graduation, I joined as an associate with the then ASG and had the  opportunity to work on high-profile cases, including the “Nirbhaya” case among others. My time in the office gave me practical exposure to handling government matters,  understanding the functioning of such offices, and working in a fast-paced environment  where cases often arrived late in the evening and required the four associates to read  files and prepare briefs within tight deadlines for the next day’s listing, which was quite  demanding and often required working late into the night. While attending meetings  and briefings was an interesting learning experience, starting the career in a designated  senior’s office has its limitations, particularly in drafting, which is an essential skill for  any litigating lawyer. Seeking more substantial drafting experience, I decided to join  an AOR in the Supreme Court with whom I was already familiar. This arrangement  allowed me to pursue my own private practice before lower courts and tribunals part time while working in the office, where I would take initiative to draft SLPs and  government-side Counters, as the office was on the panel for the State Government. 

      While this may not hold true for everyone, I had recognized that taking the AOR exam  would be professionally significant, yet I could not have anticipated the profound  impact it would have on my career once I qualified. I was aware that becoming an  Advocate-on-Record, particularly in the current generation, carries significant prestige, responsibility and accountability. Most who qualify today have amassed significant  experience across various courts and tribunals before reaching the appellate stage  practice, which equips them with a deeper understanding of the nuances of such  practice, a perspective that is harder to acquire when starting directly at that level.

      By 2014, you had taken the bold step of establishing an independent practice.  What were some of the challenges you faced and how did you navigate them? 

      When I began my independent practice, my work was mainly in lower courts, service  disputes before the CAT, and High Court litigation, and much of it non-contentious. Initially, I dedicated time to working on several pro bono cases. One of the turning  points came when I was empanelled with DLSA/DSLSA for the CAT panel, where I  was one of the five advocates and was selected on merit through a shortlisting and  interview process. It is often assumed that legal aid is confined to the economically  weaker sections, but under The Legal Services Authorities Act, children, women, senior  citizens, disabled and socially backward classes are equally entitled irrespective of  income. This gave me exposure to clients from very diverse backgrounds and allowed  me to develop the ability to handle people and their concerns at an early stage. 

      What made the experience especially meaningful was the trust it created. The  beneficiaries who appreciated my commitment towards their cause and work, often  referred me to their acquaintances, and I would also receive referrals from some  unexpected sources, such as court staff in some courts and other professional networks.  The referrals have not been confined to service matters, but I have also been entrusted  with their personal matters, including criminal, property, and matrimonial cases, among  others. These acknowledgments strengthened my belief in sincerity and perseverance  as the foundation of practice.  

      On a more personal note, I come from a family of high achievers and accomplished  individuals, most of whom have pursued structured and conventional career paths. 

      Except for my grandfather, who had earned great respect in his time as a prominent  lawyer, I had not personally heard of anyone establish an independent practice and face  the unique challenges that come with it, though I often wish he had still been practicing  when I entered the profession as he was a great inspiration and influenced my decision  to pursue law. I grew up hearing stories of how clients valued his exceptional legal  acumen and how he consistently achieved favourable verdicts. 

      Choosing litigation, and doing so as a self-made woman lawyer, brings its own set of  hurdles, but it also gave me resilience, confidence, and the satisfaction of building a  practice on my own merit. I believe it is important for anyone to have some support  system, and for me, that strength came primarily from my grandfather and parents, who  consistently encouraged me to pursue my dreams without being bound by the  conventional expectations of society.  

      You’ve dealt with a wide spectrum of cases in the Supreme Court as an Advocate on-Record, a few of which resulted in reportable judgments. How do you see these  experiences contributing to your professional and personal journey? 

      While my work in the High Court and lower courts has spanned matters, including appearances both for the government and for private parties, much of my work in the  Supreme Court has involved representing predominantly private parties, including  matters against different State Governments. What I’ve really valued about being an  AOR is the chance to engage with a wide variety of matters, all under one roof in a  short span. Over the years, I’ve handled cases touching on GST, Customs, SEBI,  statutory appeals from NCLAT, Service disputes, Transfer Petitions, and criminal  matters including bail, with some of them resulting in reportable judgments. Among  those, most recently, I argued a batch of cases concerning compassionate appointments,  where the Hon’ble Apex court upheld the High Court’s decision in favor of my clients,  granted the relief we sought, and issued important directives to the State. 

      On the professional and personal front, it is truly the vagaries of litigation that will shape you the most over time. There are days when I appear for a Petitioner/Applicant on a particular issue, and almost immediately thereafter, I may find myself defending  the Respondent on the same point in another matter. This frequent transition between perspectives necessitates not only a versatile approach to advocacy but also enhances the way one navigates difficulties in life, while also serving as a reminder that the law  is never unidimensional. 

      Your work as a mediator accredited by the International Mediation Institute  reflects a strong commitment to alternative dispute resolution. Alongside  mediation, you also have substantial experience in arbitration. In your view, how are these mechanisms evolving in India, and what role do you see them playing in  the future of dispute resolution? 

      In my view, not every conflict calls for the rigours of litigation, many can be effectively  resolved through dialogue and a planned, structured settlement process, a perspective  also endorsed by several sitting and retired judges across different courts. This line of  thought naturally steered me towards arbitration and mediation, reflecting an  inclination I had held from early on.  

      The journey for me in mediation began with intensive training of 120 hours initially with an international institute based in Germany, which involved regular simulations  and close interaction with participants from diverse jurisdictions. This foundation  gradually opened opportunities to mediate international disputes alongside colleagues  from different countries, many of whom became professional associates during the  course of training. I became involved in this sphere when mediation was still at its  nascent stage, much prior to the establishment of a statutory framework and I was aware  that it was a burgeoning field with great potential in future. Referrals followed naturally,  leading to further exposure and practice. I would like to think of mediation, by its very  nature, as an inherent skill while also one that is refined through experience and  continuous practice. Once qualified as a mediator, one need not wear the mediator’s hat  at all times. The profession demands the ability to know how to switch hats, as the skill  set of a mediator differs fundamentally from that of an advocate. 

      During mediation training, we are introduced to several techniques, which come in  handy, one of which is the classic ‘Orange parable’, it illustrates how two daughters  quarrelled over an orange; one wanted the fruit to eat, the other the peel to bake a cake.  By simply dividing it in half, each lost half of what she truly needed, but had the mother  asked why they wanted it, both could have received 100% of what they sought. The  story highlights how exploring underlying interests, rather than positions, often creates  outcomes that add value at no extra cost. 

      My interest in arbitration began during college while preparing as a speaker for a  prestigious international arbitration moot court competition. The research and learning  involved sparked a deep curiosity about the entire process. This led me to apply for an  internship with the DIAC, where I spent a few months gaining first-hand exposure  while still in college. Gradually, I began handling arbitration matters and found the process very engaging, particularly the intricacies of cross-examination, which require  precision and technicality rather than generic questioning, given that its appreciation in arbitration differs from that in a trial. A few years later, I found myself as an arbitrator  in a matter that was successfully steered towards settlement. Over the years, I joined  several national and international arbitration organizations through paid annual  memberships. While these affiliations offer valuable professional connections, I believe  the primary focus should remain on steadily building meaningful work in the field as  accumulating memberships alone, without gradually building substantive work, may  not serve a deeper purpose in advancing one’s practice or the profession. 

      It is becoming increasingly clear that ADR is not merely an alternative but represents  the future of dispute resolution. With technological advancements enabling Online  Dispute Resolution (ODR) and the legal framework evolving accordingly, it is  especially being recognized as the way forward for cross-border disputes. Even for that matter in domestic arbitration and mediation, the ability for counsels and parties to  participate remotely is a convenience that was virtually unknown until recently and with  that convenience comes a greater willingness among people to engage in the process, leaving fewer excuses to avoid it. 

      Beyond your work in courtrooms, you have also been invited to various forums  and platforms. Could you share how such opportunities have enriched your  professional journey? 

      My longstanding interest in subjects extending beyond law such as international  relations/foreign affairs, which I have actively explored by writing articles on diverse  topics that were published in reputed newspapers and journals, I believe for me, has  opened doors to unique opportunities beyond conventional legal practice. These  engagements have allowed me to be invited to various forums, media platforms and  different Embassies, participate in discussions on cross-border issues, and build  meaningful connections with diplomats and professionals in the field and beyond. Such  interactions also help to enrich your professional outlook.

      Alongside your independent practice, you serve as a Senior panel counsel for  prominent government bodies like MTNL, NDMC, MCD, DDA and others. How  different is it to represent government and public sector entities compared to  private clients, and what unique responsibilities come with it? 

      Representing government and public sector entities presents challenges and  opportunities that are distinct from a private practice involving private parties. The  outcomes in public sector matters often have far-reaching implications, potentially  impacting public funds, policy decisions, or matters of governance, rather than just  individual or corporate interests. The process of receiving and executing instructions  often involves multiple layers of guidance and approvals, requiring both patience and  clear communication as directives pass through several officials. There is also an  increased sense of accountability, as being a lawyer for the government involves  safeguarding the public interest in addition to advancing the client’s position. Timelines  and strategies can be shaped by the internal institutional protocols and procedural  requirements, yet the obligation on the panel counsels to maintain the highest  professional standards is unwavering. It requires not only a certain level of legal  expertise, understanding of the court craft but also a balanced approach that respects  both the letter of the law and the wider societal stakes involved. At the same time,  private practice from the private Petitioner and Applicant’s side offers unique rewards.  The chance to work closely with clients, shape the strategy of a matter, and see the  tangible impact of your work makes the experience deeply satisfying, while each setting  brings its own distinct professional lessons.  

      It bears mention that I have often encountered conflict of interest, since many  individuals approach me for matters involving the same departments where I am  empanelled. This highlights a limitation one cannot afford to put all their eggs in one  basket. In fact, empanelment is sometimes perceived as the ultimate goal for many  freshers, whereas in reality, it should only be meant to an end. The real challenge lies  in the dynamics of whether matters are actually assigned which has numerous variables  at play that are not always apparent to individuals aspiring for empanelment. In my  view, empanelment is valuable only if one has a reasonable prospect of leveraging them  over the long term, since more often than not they come at the cost of opportunities in  private practice that one has to forgo.

      With constant changes in legislation, regulatory frameworks, and commercial  practices, how do you stay updated on the latest legal developments? What advice  would you offer to students and young lawyers who aspire to build successful  careers in litigation and dispute resolution?

      First and foremost, I believe it is important to discover one’s own “Ikigai” , a concept  beautifully articulated in the book by the same name, which speaks of finding one’s  true purpose. For me, law was never about money or wealth, it goes much deeper. 

      At the same time, conviction alone is not enough, the law demands continuous learning,  and purpose finds its true meaning only when matched with consistency and diligence. To stay current with the constant changes in legislation, regulatory frameworks, and  commercial practices, I rely on a blend of traditional resources and contemporary tools.  I am subscribed to reputed legal journals and follow bi monthly if not weekly updates  from regulatory bodies. If a particular webinar or conference interests me, I make it a  point to watch the sessions or recordings whenever time permits, as they invariably  provide practical perspectives that go beyond what one finds in print. 

      On a more practical level, I find some WhatsApp groups to be useful for timely updates  though one must be selective, as some are driven by informal exchanges rather than  substance. I have also maintained paid subscriptions to legal databases, and whenever  possible, I even like to read international publications such as The Economist and The  Guardian to keep a more rounded view. In litigation, time management is extremely  critical. There is always too much to read and absorb, so the key lies in prioritizing  credible sources and ensuring that learning remains consistent, even if not exhaustive. After all, there are perhaps only a few professions/roles that demand knowledge across  a vast spectrum of disciplines and engagement with society at large namely those of a  judge, a civil servant and an advocate. Therefore, as a lawyer, the reading cannot be  confined to judgments alone. 

      For students and young lawyers aspiring to build careers in litigation and dispute  resolution, my advice is to not follow someone else’s path just because it worked for  them. Your journey is unique, so find what resonates with you and let it guide your  growth in this dynamic field.

      Get in touch with Ankita Sarangi –

    4. “In essence, global success in law is no longer reserved for the privileged few. With the right mindset, a commitment to growth, and the courage to take that first step, no matter how small, you can carve your own path.” – Medini Sourav Dutta, Regional Lead Legal at The Hershey Company, Malaysia.

      “In essence, global success in law is no longer reserved for the privileged few. With the right mindset, a commitment to growth, and the courage to take that first step, no matter how small, you can carve your own path.” – Medini Sourav Dutta, Regional Lead Legal at The Hershey Company, Malaysia.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      Your journey from a remote village in India to a senior legal role in a century-old American multinational is incredibly inspiring. What early experiences or turning points played a pivotal role in developing your interest in Law in the first place?

      Growing up in a remote village in Assam, access to resources was limited, but the values instilled in me, resilience, curiosity, and a strong sense of justice, were profound. I vividly remember witnessing everyday challenges faced by people in my community, often due to a lack of awareness of their rights or access to legal support. These early observations sparked a deep interest in the mechanisms of justice and how the law could serve as a tool for empowerment.

      A pivotal moment came during my school years when I had the opportunity to assist a local teacher who was helping villagers draft and understand basic legal documents. That experience, though informal, was transformative. It opened my eyes to how meaningful an impact legal knowledge could have when applied with empathy and purpose.

      Later, during my university studies, I was drawn not just to the theory of law, but also to its application in real-world, cross-border business scenarios. This interest deepened as I began to understand the role legal professionals play in shaping not only individual outcomes but also the trajectory of entire organizations.

      Each step of the way, from the modest beginnings in my village to engaging with multinational teams across continents, has been driven by a belief that the law, when practiced with integrity and foresight, can be a powerful enabler of growth, fairness, and progress.

      Spanning over 15 years across industries like pharmaceuticals, IT, and manufacturing, your career reflects both depth and versatility. What foundational lessons from your early roles continue to guide your practice today?

      One of the most enduring lessons from my early roles is the importance of listening deeply and understanding the business context before offering legal advice. Early in my career, I realized that being technically sound in law is essential but not sufficient. To be truly effective, a legal professional must align legal strategy with business objectives and operational realities. This perspective has consistently guided my approach across industries.

      Another foundational lesson is the value of clarity and simplicity in communication. Whether I was supporting a pharmaceutical company on regulatory compliance or helping an IT firm scale its contract operations, I learned that demystifying legal complexity for non-legal stakeholders builds trust and accelerates decision-making. The ability to translate legal language into practical guidance is something I continue to emphasize and foster in the teams I lead.

      Lastly, adaptability has been a constant companion. Working across different geographies and regulatory frameworks, from India to the Americas, taught me to stay agile, culturally sensitive, and open to learning. The legal landscapes may differ, but the need for sound judgment, ethical integrity, and strategic foresight remains universal.

      These early principles, business empathy, clear communication, and adaptability, have become the cornerstones of my practice and continue to shape how I engage with stakeholders, lead teams, and deliver value in complex, evolving environments.

      At The Hershey Company, you’ve played a key role in ensuring compliance with corporate governance, legal obligations, and regulatory standards across regions including APAC and Europe. Could you share one of the most challenging situations you’ve encountered in this journey, and how you effectively navigate it?

      Thank you for the question. While I must respect the confidentiality obligations inherent to my current role and cannot discuss specific internal situations, I can share that navigating complex compliance challenges across diverse jurisdictions requires a combination of proactive stakeholder engagement, cross-functional collaboration, and adaptability to evolving regulations.

      In my experience, the key to effectively managing such challenges lies in fostering open communication with local experts, aligning legal strategies with business goals, and maintaining a flexible yet rigorous approach to compliance. This mindset has consistently enabled successful navigation of complex regulatory environments without compromising confidentiality.

      With extensive experience in negotiating high-value contracts, what common pitfalls have you observed in commercial negotiations and how can legal teams proactively avoid them in high-pressure environments?

      One of the most common pitfalls I have observed in high-value commercial negotiations is focusing too heavily on legal minutiae without fully understanding the commercial drivers and deal dynamics. While it’s crucial to safeguard the company’s legal interests, an overly rigid approach can alienate the counterparty or delay progress, especially in high-pressure environments where timing and agility are critical.

      Another frequent misstep is insufficient alignment between the legal team and internal business stakeholders before negotiations begin. When legal teams are brought in late or are not fully briefed on the business objectives and risk tolerance, negotiations can become reactive rather than strategic, leading to missed opportunities or poorly structured outcomes.

      To proactively avoid these pitfalls, I emphasize the following approaches:

      1. Early and continuous collaboration: Involving legal professionals at the outset of the deal cycle fosters a proactive, strategic approach rather than a reactive one. By gaining a deep understanding of the underlying business rationale, legal teams can craft solutions that not only mitigate risks but also actively facilitate and enable the successful execution of the deal.
      2. Scenario planning and fallback positions: In high-stakes negotiations, pressure can lead to rushed decisions. By preparing fallback positions and pre-approved negotiation levers in advance, legal teams can respond quickly without compromising on key risk parameters.
      3. Clear internal alignment on priorities: Before entering negotiations, I ensure that all internal stakeholders, from finance to operations, are aligned on what is negotiable and what is not. This clarity helps present a united front and prevents conflicting messages during the negotiation process.
      4. Balancing firmness with flexibility: Successful negotiations often require finding creative middle ground. Legal teams that are solution-oriented, commercially aware, and culturally attuned are far better positioned to achieve outcomes that are both compliant and commercially viable.

      Ultimately, effective negotiation is about understanding both the legal and human elements of the deal. By staying calm under pressure, communicating clearly, and staying focused on the end goal, legal teams can not only protect the business but also enhance its reputation as a trusted and pragmatic partner.

      Legal technology and process optimization are central to your work. What do you see as the biggest opportunities and challenges for legal departments embracing automation and AI in contract lifecycle management?

      The rise of automation and AI in contract lifecycle management presents an exciting opportunity for legal departments to transform from being reactive support functions to strategic enablers of business efficiency and growth. When implemented thoughtfully, legal technology can drastically reduce cycle times, improve compliance, and deliver actionable insights from contract data, turning legal operations into a source of competitive advantage.

      With AI-powered analytics, legal teams can extract trends from thousands of contracts, identifying risks, renegotiation triggers, or compliance gaps proactively. Automation also enables standardization and scalability, especially for high-volume, low-risk agreements, freeing up legal talent to focus on complex, strategic matters.

      However, the challenges are equally significant. One major hurdle is change management. Legal functions have traditionally been risk-averse, and shifting mindsets toward embracing technology can be slow. Without clear alignment between legal, IT, procurement, and business teams, implementation can become fragmented, resulting in poor adoption and underutilized platforms.

      Another challenge is balancing automation with judgment. AI can streamline workflows, but legal decision-making still requires human insight, especially in nuanced or high-stakes scenarios. Ensuring that automation enhances, rather than replaces, critical thinking is key.

      To navigate this journey successfully, I believe legal departments should focus on three core principles:

      • Start with process clarity and optimize before automating.
      • Select tools that integrate seamlessly into existing ecosystems and workflows.
      • Invest in capability building, ensuring teams are trained not just on how to use technology, but how to extract its full strategic value.

      Ultimately, the goal is not just to automate for efficiency but to elevate the role of legal as a proactive, tech-enabled partner in the business ecosystem.

      You’ve led teams and collaborated across functions globally. What leadership principles have stayed with you, especially when working with diverse legal and business stakeholders?

      Leading and collaborating across diverse legal and business teams, often spread across different geographies, cultures, and regulatory environments, has taught me that effective leadership is grounded in empathy, clarity, and trust.

      One principle that has consistently guided me is the importance of active listening and cultural sensitivity. In global environments, legal and business perspectives can vary significantly depending on local norms, risk perceptions, and market dynamics. Taking the time to understand those perspectives, before offering solutions, builds credibility and strengthens collaboration.

      I also believe in leading with clarity of purpose. Whether I’m guiding a legal team or partnering with cross-functional stakeholders, I strive to clearly communicate goals, expectations, and the rationale behind key decisions. In complex projects, especially those involving regulatory or commercial risk, clarity helps align efforts and fosters collective ownership.

      Another key principle is empowerment through trust. I have found that giving people the space to take ownership while being available as a sounding board, creates stronger, more resilient teams. It is especially important when managing legal functions across time zones, where micromanagement is not only ineffective but also unsustainable.

      Finally, I try to lead by example, particularly when it comes to integrity and accountability. In legal roles, your credibility often precedes you. Being consistent, dependable, and fair, even under pressure, helps build long-term trust across both legal and business communities.

      In essence, leadership in a global legal context isn’t just about directing, it is about connecting, aligning diverse perspectives toward common objectives, and doing so with authenticity, respect, and strategic foresight.

      Your early exposure to litigation and dispute resolution must have provided valuable perspective. How did you decide to transition to an international practice and how did you navigate the complexities involved with it?

      My early exposure to litigation and dispute resolution gave me a solid ground in the fundamentals of legal analysis, advocacy, and risk assessment. Working on contentious matters in the Indian legal system taught me to think critically, anticipate challenges, and understand the nuances of courtroom dynamics, all of which are invaluable skills, even outside the litigation context.

      However, over time, I became increasingly drawn to the preventive and strategic side of legal practice, particularly how legal frameworks could be leveraged to support business growth, mitigate risk before it materializes, and enable long-term value creation. I saw international practice as a natural evolution of this interest. It offered the opportunity to work across jurisdictions, partner closely with business leaders, and help organizations navigate regulatory complexity on a global scale.

      The transition wasn’t without challenges. Moving from a litigation-focused role to an in-house, cross-border environment required me to reorient my mindset from issue resolution to issue prevention, and from adversarial negotiation to collaborative problem-solving. I invested significant time in understanding international legal systems, both common law and civil law traditions, as well as gaining fluency in business operations and corporate governance.

      One of the most effective ways I navigated this shift was by embracing continuous learning and remaining adaptable. I took on roles that expanded my exposure to multinational operations, built relationships with colleagues across functions and cultures, and sought mentors who had successfully made similar transitions.

      In hindsight, my litigation experience gave me a strong foundation in legal rigor and risk management, while my move into international practice allowed me to broaden my impact, helping businesses not just survive legal hurdles, but thrive through strategic legal support.

      Having worked across both common and civil law systems, what key differences do you notice in legal operations, and how do you keep up with the ever changing dimensions of legal compliances across jurisdictions?

      Working across both common and civil law systems has deepened my appreciation for the diversity in legal reasoning, procedural approaches, and the role of precedent in shaping legal outcomes. In common law systems, there is a strong reliance on case law and judicial interpretation, which demands a nuanced understanding of precedent and how it evolves over time. In contrast, civil law systems are more codified and statute-driven, requiring a close reading of the legislative framework and its administrative interpretations.

      From an operational standpoint, these differences manifest in contract drafting styles, dispute resolution mechanisms, and compliance expectations. For instance, civil law jurisdictions may favor more concise contracts that rely on statutory provisions, whereas common law jurisdictions often require more detailed, self-contained agreements. Similarly, the pace and approach to regulatory enforcement can vary widely. What is standard in one jurisdiction may be seen as intrusive or inadequate in another.

      To manage these complexities, I take a proactive, layered approach to legal compliance:

      • Local Expertise: I collaborate closely with local counsel and regional experts to stay aligned with jurisdiction-specific interpretations and enforcement trends. This ensures that our global strategies are grounded in local realities.
      • Knowledge Sharing and Internal Training: I prioritize creating internal awareness through cross-functional training, compliance toolkits, and internal policy updates, making sure legal and business teams are equipped to operate responsibly across borders.
      • Regulatory Monitoring and Strategic Technology Use: I leverage legal tech solutions and regulatory intelligence platforms to track evolving legal landscapes, particularly in areas like data privacy, ESG, and trade compliance, where change is rapid and multidimensional.
      • Harmonization with Flexibility: Wherever possible, I advocate for harmonized global processes that can be tailored for local adaptation. This allows for consistency in core legal and compliance principles while respecting jurisdictional nuances.

      Ultimately, navigating these varied legal systems requires not only technical knowledge, but also cultural sensitivity, open communication, and a commitment to continuous learning. It is this blend of structure and adaptability that allows legal operations to remain effective and compliant in a constantly shifting global environment.

      What advice would you offer to young legal professionals particularly those from non-metropolitan backgrounds aspiring to make a mark globally? And how do you personally stay ahead in this ever-evolving legal ecosystem?

      To young legal professionals, particularly those from non-metropolitan or modest backgrounds, I want to say that your origin does not define your destination. What matters most is your willingness to learn, your resilience in the face of challenges, and your ability to adapt. I come from a remote village in Assam, and I understand firsthand the barriers, both visible and invisible, that can make global aspirations seem out of reach. But those very roots can also be your greatest strength. They teach you humility, grit, and the power of persistence.

      My advice is to focus on building a strong foundation in both legal knowledge and practical skills. Be curious, ask questions, and don’t shy away from stepping outside your comfort zone. Seek mentors, even if informally, and be open to feedback. Language, geography, or access may feel like limitations initially, but with consistency, self-discipline, and digital access to global knowledge, those gaps can be closed.

      Also, understand that legal excellence today goes beyond black-letter law. Develop a commercial mindset, be tech-aware, and build cultural fluency. In a globalized legal ecosystem, your ability to collaborate across time zones, cultures, and functions is just as critical as your ability to interpret a statute.

      As for how I stay ahead in this evolving field, it is a combination of continuous learning, strategic networking, and hands-on collaboration. I make it a point to stay informed through industry publications, legal tech forums, and cross-functional discussions. I also learn immensely from mentoring others which offers fresh perspectives and keeps me grounded.

      In essence, global success in law is no longer reserved for the privileged few. With the right mindset, a commitment to growth, and the courage to take that first step, no matter how small, you can carve your own path.

      Get in touch with Medini Sourav Dutta –

    5. “I was fascinated by the intersection between intellectual property and everyday life and how trade mark practitioners must strike a balance between protecting a fair monopoly and allowing innovation and creativity to thrive.” – Kim Rampersadh, Trade Mark Attorney and Partner at Adams & Adams, South Africa.

      “I was fascinated by the intersection between intellectual property and everyday life and how trade mark practitioners must strike a balance between protecting a fair monopoly and allowing innovation and creativity to thrive.” – Kim Rampersadh, Trade Mark Attorney and Partner at Adams & Adams, South Africa.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      With over a decade of experience, what initially drew you to a career in law, and what inspired your decision to specialize in intellectual property and trademarks?

      I have always appreciated how rules and the law govern society and, from a young age, developed a strong sense of justice and fairness. What the law represents therefore resonated with me strongly and pursuing a career in law was a vocation.  Of course, having parents, who deeply value education, and who have very conventional ideas of employment, made my decision to pursue law an easy one. 

      The decision to specialise as a trade mark practitioner I credit to Adams & Adams. My relationship with Adams & Adams predates my employment with the firm and from that first interaction I was fascinated by the intersection between intellectual property and everyday life and how trade mark practitioners must strike a balance between protecting a fair monopoly and allowing innovation and creativity to thrive. The intellectual diversity of a trade mark practice inspired my choice.  

      Looking back at your early years as an attorney, what key lessons or experiences shaped your current approach to trade mark law and brand protection strategies?

      There are too many learnings to cite, but those with the most profound impact are:

      • being accountable, which translates to taking responsibility for all aspects relating to you, including the advice provided, your professional development and knowledge, and levelling with a client when things go right or wrong; and
      • shifting your mindset, so that within the legal problem you can identify opportunities for you and/or your client and add value that enhances business. 

      As a Partner at Adams & Adams, you handle complex, multi-jurisdictional matters. How do you balance strategic advisory, litigation, and client relationship management while leading within a large IP firm?

      Being knowledgeable and confident in one’s field, keeping up to date with developments, working systematically, and developing sound knowledge of and relationships with clients have all made striking that ever-elusive balance manageable as an individual practitioner. However, I would be remiss in not acknowledging that building trust with and reliance on team mates, colleagues from other jurisdictions and my own partners in business have all positively contributed to the handling of my practice and developing and realising aspirations and achievements. The combination of my personal attributes and professional networks and support make my day-to-day rewarding and sometimes balanced. 

      You’ve developed extensive expertise in enforcing trade mark rights across Africa. What are the most significant legal and practical challenges you encounter, and how do you navigate them?

      The diversity of the African continent is to be celebrated, but that same diversity can make enforcement in Africa challenging. Historically, many African states were subject to colonial rule by different countries that resulted in the different states adopting varied languages, including indigenous languages, and different legal frameworks and considerations. Some states have also not adopted the typical international treaties, and their own local law and practice is unique to their territory. Cultural nuances which are also varied, can play a role in the interpretation of legislation and its enforcement. To date, therefore, diversity in language, culture and legal practice affect how I practise brand enforcement from one territory to the next. 

      The continent still suffers from a lack of resources and infrastructure in parts which makes obtaining information relevant to enforcement difficult. This has, however, compelled me to be more liberal and innovative in strategies for enforcement. 

      With brands expanding rapidly into international markets, how do you approach developing cross-border IP strategies that ensure robust protection while remaining compliant with diverse regulatory frameworks?

      As exciting as expanding into international markets is, it is also challenging. Crafting a cross-border strategy requires foresight and flexibility and my approach includes:

      • assessing the current level of protection and any gaps in protection;
      • prioritising the acquisition of protection in line with business goals and the risk to business from one territory to the next – which means understanding the target business well and collaborating closely with the IP owner;
      • considering the benefits of protection afforded by international treaties and how they are treated practically in each jurisdiction and weighing that against regional and national filing systems in Africa, if applicable; 
      • leveraging technology to afford brand owners watching services specific to Africa with early access to publications; 
      • staying abreast of developments in legislation and practice in each country and considering how those affect existing rights;  
      • leveraging our professional networks to liaise with local attorneys, who frequently knowledge-share and assist us in understanding whether the IP in question can be protected and enforced; and
      • developing and maintaining knowledge of regulatory frameworks outside of IP protection which affect the relevant business, and which dictate how we tailor the approach so that there is compliance with those regulations, too.

      Could you share an example of a particularly challenging matter you handled and how you successfully resolved it?

      The most challenging case that I have encountered is still ongoing. It is a matter with theoretically excellent merits in favour of the brand owner, but the matter has suffered due to archaic legal provisions and practices, unforeseen delays and external factors unique to the specific jurisdiction and outside of the control of the attorneys involved. That said, my view is that the matter will ultimately be resolved in favour of the brand owner, due to:

      • flexibility in our enforcement strategy; 
      • reliance on astute counsel that are knowledgeable in their fields and who have never veered from their solutions-orientated approach; 
      • keeping alive to developments in other cases and areas of law, which aid the progression of the case; 
      • managing the brand owner’s expectations as we work together towards achieving the desired business goal; and
      • offering high levels of client service and attention to detail, so that the brand owner can appreciate the value added even when the outlook seems bleak. 

      Technology is transforming IP practice worldwide. How do you see tools like AI influencing trade mark prosecution, monitoring, and enforcement in the African context?

      AI is re-shaping trade mark practice globally and Africa is no exception. I anticipate that the incorporation of AI tools for purposes of conducting clearance searches, better tracking of renewals and online platform monitoring for infringement and the like will become commonplace. AI tools now available are seemingly modelled on developed, western data bases and the ease of access that they promote. In Africa, there are, of course, difficulties with legal frameworks, infrastructure and the reliability of local Registry records, which may affect the training of AI models and therefore their roll out and relevance to practice in Africa. Within that, however, seems to be an opportunity for the development of localised AI models, perhaps even by African creators and tech companies, that promise more relevance to the legal landscape in Africa.

      Given your experience in advertising and IP regulatory compliance, what key trends or pitfalls should brand owners be mindful of when operating in Africa, especially with the growth of digital marketing?

      Africa has cottoned on to the digital marketing boom with a surge in influencer and video-content marketing. This trend presents exciting opportunities and complex legal terrain with many countries in Africa relying on outdated legislation and enforcement mechanisms, or not having legislation that regulates, for instance, influencer marketing. This means resorting to traditional legal remedies and forums to address advertising concerns, which is not ideal. However, there is an increasing trend of awareness about the IP challenges arising from digital marketing and many countries are making good progress in adapting their legal frameworks to better deal with these challenges. For instance, South Africa’s Code of Advertising Practice now includes a Social Media code and there is a direct link for communicating decisions from the Advertising Regulatory Board to Meta. In addition, Nigeria recently revamped its copyright legislation and founded an Advertising Regulatory Council to deal with advertising complaints. There has also been an uptick in the promulgation of data privacy legislation in many African states and cases before African regulators and courts dealing with privacy and personality rights infringements arising from digital marketing. These developments are testament, in my view, to African awareness of the need for sound regulatory frameworks and treatment of digital advertising and related regulatory concerns.   

      As a partner in one of Africa’s leading IP firms, what leadership principles guide your work? What advice would you give aspiring IP practitioners who want to build a successful career in this specialized field, particularly in Africa?

      The leadership principles enshrined in the core values of Adams & Adams are those which I live by, personally and professionally. Of particular importance to me are the values of Constant Improvement, Integrity and Ethics, People-centriticty, Teamwork and Respect and Innovation. 

      My advice for aspiring trade mark practitioners is to realise that ambition by growing and showing interest and knowledge in new developments in or relevant to IP law and aligning with like-minded individuals already in the legal fraternity, who can mentor you and lead you towards pursuing a career in the field. 

      Looking ahead, where do you see the greatest opportunities and challenges for brand owners in Africa over the next decade, and how do you foresee trademark enforcement evolving with economic integration and technological advancements?

      With the lack of legacy wealth and infrastructure in Africa, it seems that digitally and technologically aware natives will drive business trends and move business further away from traditional models to allow greater access to and awareness of their brands on a more global scale via, for instance, mobile-first ecommerce sites. With the advent of the African Continental Free Trade Area, which creates access to a unified market in Africa with reduced tariffs, it is expected that there will be a boost in cross-border brand expansion on the continent and promotion for African brand loyalty. These two developments present great opportunities for Africans and brand owners generally, but the advent of new technologies and a unified market also imply a surge in trade mark violations and ease of access to goods that may infringe legally protected IP. Enforcement strategies will be dictated to by these developments, and it is foreseeable that brand owners will need to re-prioritise protection for trade marks in countries not otherwise considered a high priority. It is also expected that policy makers will exert further pressure on governments to introduce legislation that conforms to the trends in business and caters for unconventional infringements. In the meantime, and until the law catches up with trends in commerce and technology, attorneys and adjudicators will need to be innovative in their interpretation and the implementation of existing legal frameworks in resolving disputes. 

      Get in touch with Kim Rampersadh –

    6. “An international legal career is not just about crossing borders it’s about bridging legal systems, people, and perspectives.” – Sandip Bhosale, Senior Legal Manager at Maatrum Technologies.

      “An international legal career is not just about crossing borders it’s about bridging legal systems, people, and perspectives.” – Sandip Bhosale, Senior Legal Manager at Maatrum Technologies.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      You’ve advised on major infrastructure, real estate, and cross-border commercial transactions across India and Southeast Asia. How has this international exposure influenced your approach to corporate legal practice?

      Advising on major cross-border transactions in Southeast Asian Countries including Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar has significantly shaped my approach to corporate legal practice in three key ways: adaptability, cultural intelligence, and risk sensitivity.

      Working across jurisdictions each with its own regulatory landscape, commercial norms, and legal frameworks requires a flexible, solution-oriented mindset. I have learned to quickly assess unfamiliar legal systems and align them with international best practices, ensuring seamless integration for clients operating in multiple markets. Cross-border deals are not just about laws they are about people, relationships, and negotiation styles that vary widely across Southeast Asia. Understanding these nuances has allowed me to anticipate counterparties’ priorities and negotiate more effectively, often bridging gaps that go beyond legal language. 

      I remember, in the beginning of my career, I was a part of foreign lawyers team, where we used to discuss best practices in various jurisdictions. We use to work collaboratively with local counsel to structure transactions that are both legally sound and commercially viable. Overall, this international experience has reinforced a pragmatic, forward-thinking approach to corporate law balancing legal precision with commercial acumen, always with a view toward helping clients achieve cross-border growth sustainably.

      Having worked on joint ventures, franchise agreements, and market entry strategies in countries like Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos, what legal or regulatory challenges do you think foreign investors often underestimate in these markets?

      In my experience advising on joint ventures, franchise agreements, and market entry strategies in countries like Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos, foreign investors often underestimate several legal and regulatory challenges, particularly in three areas: regulatory opacity, local partner risks, and enforcement/judicial system. Investors often assume that laws, especially investment and company laws are fully codified and consistently applied. In reality, many regulations in these markets are underdeveloped, ambiguously worded, or enforced unevenly. 
      In joint ventures and franchise models, investors may overlook the importance of deep local due diligence. Investors sometimes don’t appreciate how vital it is to assess a partner’s political exposure, informal influence networks, or track record of compliance, not just their balance sheet. I have also done due diligence of local entities for JV transactions. 
      While contracts might be drafted to international standards, enforcement is a different story. Judicial systems in these markets may lack independence, speed, or the capacity to handle commercial disputes efficiently. Arbitration clauses are increasingly used, but enforcing foreign arbitral awards still comes with practical and procedural hurdles.

      From securing mining permissions to resolving land litigation and facilitating tribal land sales, your work requires extensive coordination with government authorities. What strategies have proven most effective for you in managing complex regulatory and compliance issues?

      Managing complex regulatory and compliance issues especially in areas like mining permissions, land litigation, and tribal land transactions requires a combination of strategic planning, stakeholder engagement, and proactive communication.  initiating dialogue early in the process. Building trust and rapport helps in reducing delays and misunderstandings later. Collaborating with local consultants or retired officials who understand the ground realities and bureaucratic procedures helps in navigating procedural bottlenecks effectively.

      With your diverse experience across jurisdictions and sectors, how do you stay abreast of rapidly evolving legal landscapes, particularly when advising on cross-border transactions?

      I stay updated through leading international legal databases, newsletters from top law firms, and updates from regulatory bodies like SEBI, RBI, and international organizations. 

      For cross-border matters, I work closely with reputed local law firms in the relevant jurisdictions such as Lao Law and Consultancy. Their insights help ensure that advice is aligned with both local practice and international best standards.

      Beyond black-letter law, I track economic policies, sanctions regimes, and trade developments that influence cross-border deal structuring and risk allocation. This enables more holistic legal advisory.

      You’ve worked closely with operations and tech teams to streamline legal workflows. In your view, what role should technology play in modern legal practice, especially in areas like due diligence and contract lifecycle management?

      Technology is no longer a support function, it’s becoming a core enabler of modern legal practice. Especially in areas like due diligence and contract lifecycle management (CLM), its role is transformative.

      CLM platforms provide insights into contract performance, risk patterns, and renewal cycles. This allows legal teams to move from reactive to proactive governance and to offer business-aligned advice. Tech solutions can flag non-standard clauses, track obligations, etc. By offloading routine work to tech tools, legal teams can focus on higher-value tasks such as negotiation, risk strategy, etc.

      What inspired you to pursue a career in law, and how did your time at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, including your Master’s specialization in Business Law, shape your legal perspective?

      Coming from a family with no legal background, I often saw people around me struggle with legal issues due to a lack of awareness and access to proper legal guidance. I realized there was a gap and I felt a strong desire to bridge it. The idea of becoming the first in my family to step into the legal field gave me both a sense of responsibility and purpose. It inspired me to be a source of support not just for my family, but for others in similar situations. I wanted to break new ground and prove that even without a legal legacy, one can make a meaningful impact through dedication, learning, and service.”

      My time at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL) was pivotal in shaping this vision. The university’s strong academic rigor, coupled with exposure to national-level moot courts, legal aid work, and policy discussions, grounded my understanding of the law not just as theory, but as a practical force. RGNUL also offered a diverse peer network and faculty mentorship that encouraged critical thinking, debate, and an ethical approach to legal practice. 

      You began your career with an international legal consultancy which is a significant early achievement. What steps did you take to secure this opportunity, and what foundational lessons from that phase still guide your practice today?

      Securing an opportunity with Lao Law & Consultancy (LLC) early in my career was the result of deliberate planning, consistent effort, and a focus on aligning my skills with global standards. During law school, I prioritized building a strong foundation in commercial and corporate law while simultaneously engaging in internships, seminars and research etc. 

      Foundational lessons from that early phase continue to guide my practice today. Understanding that legal advice must be commercially viable and actionable. Recognizing the importance of jurisdictional nuances and the need for precision in cross-border matters. Operating in a fast-paced international setting taught me to stay agile, culturally sensitive, and committed to lifelong learning.

      In your current role, where you oversee land-related legal compliance and litigation for mining operations, what are the industry specific legal challenges you face?

      Mining projects often span large, fragmented parcels of land, including private, government, forest, and tribal lands. Ensuring clear title, verifying ownership history, and addressing legacy encumbrances or informal claims requires intensive due diligence and strategic legal structuring. I was fortunate to advice and clear more than 600 Acres acquisition in Maharashtra for mining activities. Having previous experience in dealing with land acquisition and due diligence for renewable energy projects helped me a lot in mining projects as well. 

      A significant challenge lies in obtaining approvals for tribal land transfer, conversion of land from Class-II to Class-I. Obtaining approvals from Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS), Forest Departments etc. These processes are time-consuming, community-sensitive, and legally intricate. I was also witness to the Public Hearing for a mining project in Maharashtra. 

      Mining projects frequently face PILs, NGO-led litigation on grounds of environmental impact, displacement, or procedural lapses, litigation for land compensation enhancement. I have seen and studied more than 70 petition filed by local persons for land acquisition compensation enhancement. 

      The involvement of multiple authorities revenue, forest, tribal welfare, mining, Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) and environment often leads to conflicting interpretations or procedural overlaps.

      What advice would you give to students aiming to build an international legal career? Are there any resources or habits that have helped you stay ahead of evolving global legal trends?

      Solid grounding in contract law, corporate law, and dispute resolution is essential. Prioritize analytical thinking and precision in legal writing skills that are universally respected across jurisdictions. Don’t limit your reading to national statutes. Study international treaties, arbitral awards, and cross-border case law to understand legal reasoning across systems. Intern with firms that handle cross-border work.Learn a foreign language if possible it can be a major advantage.

      Lastly, stay curious and open to different legal cultures. An international legal career is not just about crossing borders it’s about bridging legal systems, people, and perspectives.

      Get in touch with Sandip Bhosale –

    7. “I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals.” – Purvi Mathur, Managing & Co-Founding Partner at KP Associates, Advocates & Consultants.

      “I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals.” – Purvi Mathur, Managing & Co-Founding Partner at KP Associates, Advocates & Consultants.

      This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

      Looking back at your career and the successful practice you’ve built today, what were the key experiences that initially led you toward pursuing law? What moments or influences made you choose law as a career? Additionally, how did your time at NLU Gujarat shape and deepen your passion for the field?

      I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals. A defining moment came during my undergraduate years when I saw a family dispute escalate simply due to lack of proper legal guidance. This showed me that law isn’t just about statutes, but about people and relationships.

      NLU Gujarat was transformative. The practical learning approach, diverse legal exposure through moot courts and internships, and exceptional faculty mentorship developed the critical thinking skills that guide my practice today. The institution’s emphasis on real-world application deepened my understanding of law’s potential to create positive change.

      In the early years of your practice, what experiences helped you build a stronger understanding of the law and laid the foundation for your career? Could you share some key lessons from that period that would benefit our young readers?

      Working across different practice areas initially provided invaluable insights into how various legal disciplines intersect. A pivotal experience was advising a struggling startup on restructuring, which required understanding corporate law, employment regulations, and tax implications simultaneously teaching me that modern legal practice demands interdisciplinary expertise.

      Key lessons for young practitioners: embrace every learning opportunity regardless of how mundane it seems; develop strong communication skills to translate complex legal concepts into actionable business advice; build relationships based on trust and transparency; and stay curious; the law evolves constantly, and successful practitioners evolve with it.

      What inspired you to establish your own practice? What were some of the challenges you faced in the beginning, and how did you navigate those obstacles?

      I wanted to create a practice that delivered personalized, innovative legal solutions while maintaining the highest ethical standards combining the expertise of larger firms with the agility and client focus of boutique practices.

      Initial challenges included building credibility, establishing a client base, and managing financial constraints while maintaining service quality. 

      I navigated these through strategic relationship building, delivering exceptional results on smaller matters to build credibility, and focusing on becoming specialists in chosen practice areas rather than trying to be everything to everyone. We never compromised on quality to win business – a principle that ultimately distinguished us in the market.

      Cross-border transactions often involve navigating multiple legal frameworks and jurisdictions. How do you manage the complexities of these deals? What are the critical legal considerations businesses must keep in mind when engaging in cross-border transactions, and how do you ensure compliance with international legal standards while advising clients?

      We manage complexity through systematic due diligence across all relevant jurisdictions, collaborating with trusted local counsel worldwide. Our framework maps regulatory requirements, tax implications, and compliance obligations for each jurisdiction involved.

      Critical considerations include foreign investment regulations, tax treaty implications, currency exchange controls, sector-specific restrictions, dispute resolution mechanisms, and enforcement challenges across different legal systems.

      We ensure compliance through jurisdiction-specific checklists, regular regulatory updates, and maintaining relationships with qualified local counsel. Our approach emphasizes early identification of potential conflicts between legal systems and structuring transactions to minimize regulatory friction while ensuring comprehensive documentation that anticipates cross-jurisdictional enforcement challenges.

      With the evolving landscape of CSR compliance, what trends do you foresee emerging in the near future? Additionally, could you share how you guide clients in aligning their CSR strategies with both domestic and international laws?

      Emerging trends include mandatory climate disclosures, supply chain responsibility requirements, and stakeholder-centric reporting. We’re seeing convergence between ESG standards and domestic CSR requirements, with increased focus on measurable impact assessment and integration with business strategy.

      We guide clients by conducting comprehensive assessments of applicable domestic and international obligations, then developing CSR strategies that exceed minimum compliance while creating genuine business value. Our approach emphasizes robust documentation, impact measurement systems, regular compliance audits, and integration of CSR considerations into business decision-making processes.

      Start-ups face several challenges when it comes to establishing their legal foundations. What are the most common legal hurdles that start-ups should address early on? How do you assist them with crucial aspects like intellectual property rights, employee agreements, and business structuring?

      Common hurdles include inadequate business structuring, insufficient IP protection, poorly drafted founder and employee agreements, and underestimating regulatory compliance requirements.

      Our approach begins with comprehensive business structure analysis considering investment plans, tax efficiency, and regulatory requirements. For IP, we conduct thorough audits and establish protection strategies including trademark registrations and robust confidentiality frameworks. Employee agreements require balancing company protection with talent attraction—we draft comprehensive contracts and establish equity participation frameworks.

      We emphasize establishing good governance practices early, including board structures, decision-making processes, and compliance systems that become crucial as startups scale.

      Given your expertise in handling family estate disputes, what aspects of family law do you feel need more focus or reform? How do you approach succession planning for high-net-worth families, especially when dealing with complex cross-border elements?

      Family law needs greater focus on alternative dispute resolution and preventive legal structures. The current system often exacerbates conflicts rather than resolving them constructively.

      For high-net-worth succession planning, we begin with comprehensive family and asset mapping, then develop flexible structures adaptable to changing circumstances. Cross-border elements require careful jurisdiction selection, appropriate trust structures, and documentation that anticipates enforcement issues across different legal systems.

      Our methodology emphasizes family governance frameworks including family constitutions, communication protocols, and dispute resolution mechanisms, with regular plan updates to reflect changing family circumstances and regulatory environments.

      Trust formation is often a delicate issue, especially for business families. Could you elaborate on your approach to setting up trusts and advising clients on succession planning? What are some common misconceptions businesses or individuals might have about trust formation, and how do you address these?

      Our approach begins with thorough understanding of family dynamics, business structures, and long-term goals, then designing flexible trust structures that serve multiple purposes while maintaining adaptability.

      Common misconceptions include believing trusts provide absolute asset protection, assuming trust formation means loss of control, and underestimating ongoing compliance requirements. Many don’t understand differences between trust types and their specific applications.

      We address these through comprehensive education about trust mechanics, clear explanation of rights and obligations, and realistic assessment of benefits and limitations. For business families, we focus on structures facilitating business continuity while providing appropriate family financial security, often involving multiple trust vehicles and governance frameworks for family participation in business decisions.

      Your commitment to fostering diversity in the legal profession is commendable. How do you ensure aspiring lawyers have the mentorship and opportunities they need within your firm? What qualities do you look for when mentoring young lawyers, and what advice do you offer them as they navigate the legal profession?

      We ensure opportunities through inclusive hiring practices, structured mentorship programs pairing senior and junior lawyers across practice areas, meaningful work assignments, and regular professional development workshops.

      In mentoring, I look for intellectual curiosity, ethical grounding, strong communication skills, and resilience. Technical skills can be taught, but these fundamental qualities determine long-term success.

      My advice focuses on building strong foundational skills, maintaining ethical standards regardless of pressure, developing business acumen alongside legal expertise, and understanding that successful careers are built on relationships and reputation. Most importantly, find meaning in your work – legal practice provides unique opportunities to make positive differences in people’s lives.

      With your demanding career and leadership role, how do you personally manage work-life balance? Additionally, how do you encourage your team to maintain a healthy balance while excelling in their roles?

      I maintain balance through disciplined time management, prioritizing high-impact activities, delegating effectively, and protecting family time. Sustainable success comes from managing energy, not just time.

      For the team, we’ve implemented realistic project timelines, adequate staffing, flexible work arrangements where possible, and measure success by results and client satisfaction, not hours worked. We encourage time off and maintain open communication about workload concerns.

      Most importantly, I model healthy balance myself. Teams take cues from leadership, so demonstrating that it’s possible to excel professionally while maintaining personal well-being encourages others to do the same. We celebrate achievements and recognize that sustainable careers require attention to both professional and personal development.

      Get in touch with Purvi Mathur –