Super Lawyer

Tag: New York University School of Law

  • Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

    Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

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

    As a dual qualified lawyer, we would love to start from the very beginning. How and when did you decide to pursue law, and how did you end up deciding that it was the right time to move on and do your LL.M. as well? We would love to understand your journey, challenges, and how you built your road to excellence.

    I’m from Benares. I did my schooling there, and my father has a business and is also very active in social work. Back then, when I was in school, he used to write letters to authorities on various legal issues, troubles, or policy changes he thought were required for businesses in India. I used to take an active interest in what he was writing, and sometimes he would ask me to draft those letters. I think that’s how writing and my early interface with law and business began at home.

    When I was faced with the question of what I wanted to do, looking back now, I find it quite funny. There were many doctors in my family, so the obvious choice seemed to be medicine. But when I said I wanted to be a doctor, everyone at home said, “Oh no, we already have too many doctors, you should become a civil servant.” So, I initially wanted to become a civil servant, and that’s why I went to National Law University, Delhi. I thought, in Delhi we have everything, all the coaching, and law was considered a great subject for IAS aspirants.

    But when I started studying law, even before entering college, while preparing for CLAT and AILET, I fell in love with it. I used to read The Indian Express and The Hindu daily in Benares. I joined online coaching with Career Launcher because law wasn’t a very well-known option there at that time. This was back in 2012, and now it feels like history. Those days of reading newspapers and following legal developments made me fall in love with law. I realized that after studying law you could do everything a civil servant or even a politician could do in public interest litigation, fighting for the rights of disadvantaged people, becoming a corporate lawyer, anything was possible. The sky was the limit. So, I decided I wanted to stick with law.

    You don’t necessarily have to be a public lawyer, or a corporate lawyer, or any one thing you can carve your own path. That’s when I firmly decided to become a lawyer. Initially, I thought I would practice in the Supreme Court of India. I never imagined I would go to the US. My frame of mind was always to practice in Indian courts.

    By God’s grace, I was selected for National Law University, Delhi, with an All India Rank of six, and I was the first person from Banaras to enter that institution. For a long time, I think I was the only one from my city there. My parents were very supportive, and Delhi gave me tremendous exposure. One thing I learned is that if you work hard, you will succeed.

    I had no legal background, and I didn’t know where I would end up after five years. So, I focused on exploring. I did about 21 or 22 internships in college, which was one of the highest numbers in my batch. I never went back to Banaras during vacations I stayed in Delhi and kept interning. I was not sure whether I wanted to go into the private sector, NGOs, or litigation, so I tried them all.

    Eventually, I realized that I am guided by two principles: hard work and being the best version of myself. When I thought about how to achieve that, I felt pursuing an LL.M. would help me grow further. I also felt my education was incomplete without it. So, after all the internships and hard work in college, I decided to pursue an LL.M. I wrote my SOPs, appeared for exams, and went through the application process, which eventually led me to New York University.

    But more importantly, I want law students, especially those from smaller cities, to know that anything is possible. I consider myself from Banaras, which back then was not a Prime Minister’s constituency or the sought-after city it has become today. I am happy to see its growth now, but at that time it was still considered a small city. I want students from such places to believe that if you work hard and your aim is excellence, you can reach wherever you put your mind to.

    From being in one of the top universities in India to one of the top universities in the world. So how was your journey and the transition? There must be a lot of difference between the academia of NLU Delhi and New York University School of Law. While you were pursuing, what did you do and how did you make sure that your hard work paid off in the US as well? And what was your challenge over there, or maybe whatever you felt was very different and how you approached it differently with all your diligence and hard work. We would love to hear that story as well so that students and learners can understand that for a person who has done 22 internships in NLU Delhi and ended up at NYU, she has made a name for herself. How have you done that?

    It should be near 22, 21, or 25. I’m not sure of the number now. You can check my LinkedIn and I’m not even sure if I put all of them there. But anyway, I would want current students or current law students to take the LL.M. not only as an academic pursuit, not only as an academic course. I want them to take it as a professional pursuit as well. Since it involves a lot of investment, I don’t want students to just go and study. Of course, those who can afford it and who have academic inclinations or want to pursue academia should, by all means, go and do that. But many students fail to understand that the LL.M. is also an opportunity to pursue professional opportunities, and for that they have gone to the US. So utilize the LL.M. for networking opportunities, for exposing yourself to different careers and career professionals.

    I don’t want current NLU students or any law students who are in their fifth year to think they will just study as much as they can in one year when they’re going to the US, London, or Singapore. They should have a balanced course, take the minimum number of credits required, and then start learning outside of college and the classroom as well.

    You have conferences every day. You meet professors, you go to law firms, attend their networking events, and learn what the profession really is. That is very important. This is something students should start thinking about when they are in their fifth year of law school.

    This is one takeaway that I had. And to answer your question, the difference between NYU and NLU Delhi was that at NYU, it’s a totally Socratic method of education. No one is going to check if you are studying or not. You have to guide your own education.

    You have to pick your own subjects, you have to guide your own education, and you are fully responsible for your future, like any adult. So I think an LL.M. or Master’s should be done by an adult who knows what he or she is doing, and what he or she wants to pursue. If you are not sure about that, I would say work a few years in India before going to NYU or doing any LL.M. for that matter. At NYU, I had amazing faculty members who were already great and accomplished professionals. Even in the classroom, we were getting both theoretical and practical knowledge, how you would actually do something in a law firm or in court. That’s what makes the LL.M. different. That’s why it is a Master’s.

    And again, landing a job in the US was very difficult. As Indian citizens, we have to get H-1B sponsorship.

    You have to qualify through a lottery, then you have to get H-1B sponsorship, and you have to qualify the bar exam. Again, if you want, I can elaborate on the subject of how to land a job in the US, but that itself is a different conversation.

     We’d love to understand that also because obviously the people or the students who would like to maybe see how they can plan it. Like you have explained that these are the processes, it’ll be very, very helpful if you can talk a little bit about this aspect as well. How to actually land a job, because that is another struggle. The first struggle is to reach there, and then the second struggle is to find a better job where you can stay and work as well.

    Sure. So when we are in LLM, first of all, we are outside of our shelter. We have to start managing our food, our household, and it’s a foreign country. You are away from your family. It’s new people, plus it’s the pressure of finding a job. It’s a lot of things. So I always tell students to prioritize their wellbeing.

    Give full hundred percent to your education because, at the end of the day, all employers are going to look at your transcript. So you should be very sure not to overburden yourself and not to take extra credits just for your academic satisfaction. Take those kinds of credits which will help you land jobs in the US.

    Like if I’m a corporate lawyer, if someone wants to be a corporate lawyer, they should take mergers and acquisitions, securities, business law, contracts drafting, subjects like this, which make you eligible to sit for the bar exam and which make you a good candidate for the law firms over there. First take only those kinds of subjects. This can be a very controversial thing that I’m saying, don’t do subjects for your academic interest, but to each its own.

    And if you have been there with a lot of financial difficulties and with a lot of struggles, you want to make sure that you get the best opportunity when you are out of that college. I speak with several students from India and all they want is a job in the US after doing LLM because they have put in that kind of resources to get selected for an LLM to go there.

    So I would say, manage your academics well. Don’t overburden yourself and do well in academics. Start networking outside of your law school, inside your law school, network with your law professors. And networking is a long process. Like everyone says, network, network, network. But what is it? First, I would say it’s a sport.

    The more you do, the better you become at it. And it’s going to be a two-way process. Like mentoring, you are going to be a mentee to someone, but again, just don’t be entitled to anyone, don’t just walk up and say, I need a job. You have to learn from their experiences.

    You have to invest time with them so that the people you are speaking with in the US, who you are networking with, should understand that this person is worthy of mentoring. Become mentees to some good professionals in the US. Learn from their experiences. Follow them, genuinely follow them, genuinely learn from them.

    And it’s a two-way street. Everyone knows when you’re speaking with them that you’re looking for a job. So at the end of the day, if they find an opportunity, they will let you know. And you have to keep talking to multiple people, reach out on LinkedIn, email people.

    That’s what I did and that’s how I got a job. And that’s how law students from India who have no connections or who don’t have a background in law, have to make their own connections and that’s how they land a job. But it’s all about hard work and perseverance. It’s not about how smart you are to get a job in the US, it’s about your perseverance and your hard work.

    While in the US, when you started your LLM and began working, you were also a Legal Research Analyst with Jethmalani & Nallaseth PLLC. After that, you were associated with Nishith Desai Associates as well, in the US itself. So how did you plan it? Why did you decide to join these institutions? And how did your internships or the kind of work profile you had in India help you understand the working environments of India and the US, because there is also a huge difference? Also, how did you adjust, and what kind of strategies did you follow to make sure you adapted well, and obviously worked as hard as you always do?

    I started my professional journey, I would say, in the US. I did all kinds of internships in India, but I never worked professionally there. I went directly for my master’s. But I worked with two institutions, as you named: Jethmalani & Nallaseth and Nishith Desai Associates, whose headquarters or main offices are in India. So I have worked with Indian institutions, I would say. And then I went to Dechert, which is a big law firm. After that, I went to Davis Wright Tremaine, which is also a big law firm.

    As you said, it’s different. But I always wanted to be a New York lawyer, a US attorney, and I was in New York, so I wanted to be a NY attorney when I was doing my LLM. As I told you initially, I have always been driven by hard work and by striving to be the best, at least persevering for the best where I am.

    When I was in LLM, I understood that being in the US and getting employed there is very difficult. You have to be hardworking, strong academically, good at networking only then can you land a job in the US. So that became a challenge for me, and whenever I’m faced with any challenge, I am motivated to tackle it.

    I had to come back to India after LLM, but I thought, “Oh no, this is very challenging. Only the best of the best, apparently, can do it.” But after these many years of experience, I can say it’s not about the best of the best, it’s about hard work and perseverance.

    Then I told my father, “Dad, why not pursue a few years of employment in the US? I want to get a job and then I’ll come back.” I felt my education in the US was not complete without a few years of professional experience. He said, “Okay, go.”

    Back then, I started looking for opportunities. As I said, I had no professional experience from India, so I went directly from NLU Delhi to NYU. So landing a job for me was very difficult. That’s why when I speak to current LLM students who have a few years of experience, I tell them, You are already at an advantageous position compared to what I was.

    I started with the first opportunity I got, which was an immigration law firm. It was not a corporate law firm. My employer was Mr. Anil Jethmalani at Jethmalani & Nallaseth. He still continues to be my mentor. He was very kind to give me my first job. He saw that I was genuine. I had interned, but had no professional experience. He sponsored my visa, and I started working there very diligently as an immigration attorney.

    We don’t have immigration practice in India, of course it is outsourced, but it’s not established there. I started working there, but I was always interested in corporate law. So I used to network, network, network. Before going to the office to do my job, which, you know, was paying my bills, I would go to different law firms, attend conferences, meet people, write to folks on LinkedIn, and request coffee chats or informational interviews. That’s how I moved to Nishith Desai Associates.

    Again, Mr. Vaibhav Parikh of Nishith Desai Associates, the head of the US offices, has been amazing and a great mentor. This was my first corporate law job. I didn’t have a corporate law background from India. I was interested in pursuing something else, but when I was exposed to different things, having done all my internships, met people, followed the news I gradually decided what I wanted to do next. I had no fixed plan initially.

    Then I decided I wanted to be a corporate lawyer, and I decided on this in New York. Some people plan it beforehand: they want to be a corporate lawyer, then do an LLM, then get the job. I decided this after finishing my LLM. Mr. Vaibhav Parikh saw potential in me, thankfully, and offered me my first corporate law job in New York. At Nishith Desai Associates, I also worked very diligently, and I hope they felt the same. I worked there for almost one and a half to two years.

    At Nishith Desai Associates, the work involved practicing Indian law. We were co-counsels with foreign law firms, doing work for US clients who wanted to have Indian operations. So essentially, we were practicing Indian law for US clients or US law firms. Having done my LLM in New York and cleared the bar exam, I wanted to be part of even bigger global law firms, working on more complex deals. That’s how I shifted to big law, to Dechert. This required a lot of networking and meeting people, and then I came to Davis Wright Tremaine, where I am currently.

    Here, I’m practicing US law as a US attorney, focusing on M&A. The clients I work for and the cases I handle are very complicated and high-profile, and I thoroughly enjoy working on them. It has been a very enriching and challenging journey so far.

    Moving from an Indian law firm to a US corporate law firm, which is one of the biggest over there, what was your way to transition? How did you make that transition so easily or with a challenge, with your hard work? Also, the kind of understanding of international jurisdictions is absolutely different when you are practicing in litigation or practicing corporate law in-office, in-house. What is your understanding about that? Also, what prompted you to decide on corporate law, and how have you managed so far?

    So I thought of corporate law and I decided on corporate law because it’s very dynamic and fast-moving, and I’m a person, sorry to say with less patience. So I want fast-moving things or fast results. Litigation takes many years, and the same applies to arbitration.

    I was interested in international arbitration as well, and I pursued a lot of courses in that. I have publications in those areas, but I saw that corporate law is dynamic and fast-moving. I would be counsel to businesses, which was my motivation to be a lawyer in the first place, having seen my father.

    I would be their go-to person. I would meet clients from the business community. It’s very fast-paced, dynamic, and logical. You have things in your control. You don’t have to stand in court for hours. You are not in front of any tribunals. If things are in your control and your co-counsel or your peer controls, I am working for my client, and the other law firms are working for their clients. I’m a very collaborative person as well. So we collaborate and give results like we collaborate to merge two companies, acquire, merge, sell, or spin off.

    I wanted to do business law. That’s how I decided to be a corporate lawyer. I’m happy about my choice of law. You can see the results of your hard work in real time, which is very satisfying.

    And how did I prepare for my roles in US firms? I would say there are a lot of similarities. Of course, the working culture is different. In Indian firms, it’s very hierarchical and fast-paced. In US firms, it’s also fast-paced, but there’s less hierarchy. Senior lawyers are actually invested in your development. That’s what I experienced in my law firms, Dechert and Davis Wright Tremaine. My seniors are heavily invested in my mentorship and learning, and that’s what I also pass on to my juniors. I get to learn a lot and also pass on that knowledge.

    It’s high-paced, with complicated cases. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we try to simplify solutions or innovate solutions for complicated problems. For example, something you could do with a 50-page SPA (Share Purchase Agreement) might be condensed to 20 pages. We try to be very efficient for our clients because they’re paying us by the hour. We try to be as efficient as possible and innovate where we can.

    So these are the differences between the two law firms, but again, to each their own. People can do whatever they want in different places, and I got to learn a lot from all of these experiences, for sure.

    What kind of qualities do you look for in candidates? Because that is also a very major part of preparation for any student. And not only qualities the way they act, the kind of etiquette that you see in them, how do you judge them? After all, an interview is just one day, but the person will be with you for a longer period of time.

    So what kind of checklist, or anything, can you share about what you observe while recruiting someone for such a big law firm?

    First of all, this is, again, a very controversial thing to say. I should feel comfortable in that person’s company. Our work hours can at times get very challenging. We have signings and closings; we are rushing, and sometimes it’s fine, but at other times it’s super stressful. So you want to work with a person who is collaborative, who is nice, who can handle tasks independently if I assign them. Of course, it varies depending on the candidate’s year, but being nice and hardworking is key.

    They should be able to take initiative. I should see from that candidate whether they are proactive and helpful, because we all work in teams, and you want people who support each other during stressful hours. Hardworking, collaborative, and nice.

    When you are interviewing with law firms like these, you are already smart. You can only get to these interviews if you are smart. So all the candidates are intelligent. The challenge is to find someone who fits our culture wherever you are. The culture I look for is collaborative, hardworking, independent, and responsible for someone who says “yes” when given responsibilities. These are the things I would look for.

    But again, this is something for law entrants to think about later. First, I would encourage them to have a spectacular CV, to be smart, and to be eligible to reach these places.

    Intern in a lot of places. If you are sure you want to do corporate law, do internships with top-notch law firms in India. Go there, do research associateships with professors during your LLM, and then go for these interviews.

    So at the very end, we would love to understand that with such a demanding professional life, the kind of commitments that you have for something you have worked so hard for, and now that you have reached that particular space, how are you planning to manage a healthy work-life balance along with being a new mom? How are you going to delegate your responsibilities, and how do you see that so far, both with your earlier life and now with being a new mom yourself? So what are your plans for times to come, and how have you managed it so far?

    So far, I think I have managed it well. Not perfectly, but at least I have reached where I am and have managed it fine. I would say strategy is key. You have to be a pre-planner and be strategic about what you’re planning.

    So far, every morning, I make my to-do list and try to prioritize things at the very beginning: what is urgent, what has to be done, what can be delegated to someone else, and what is something that has to be done by me. This is something I have to complete and submit to my seniors.

    Every morning, I do my to-do list and plan accordingly, and I make sure that I have some time for myself for walking, for the gym, or whatever. I do that in the evenings and then have dinner. But at times, you don’t get enough time, given how corporate jobs are. I think strategy, pre-planning, and thinking about the urgency of a matter of what is delegatable, non-delegatable, and what to do in the mornings is very important.

    But honestly, I’m a new mom now. I myself don’t know how I’m going to manage my motherhood, which I absolutely cherish, and I’m thankful to God for this blessing. I am just ending my maternity leave and have to rejoin my law firm job, which I really enjoy and love doing.

    So let’s see how I manage those. I’m sure in my law firm, I have a lot of mothers who are balancing work and family. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we have a very good support system and a strong group of working mothers who have been very kind with their advice. I’m sure I will learn from them. But this is something I should share with you in a few years down the line how I manage my work-life balance after being a new mom.

    Get in touch with Yashasvi Tripathi –

  • “Moving from the courtroom to corporate boardrooms, I learned to switch between adversarial advocacy and collaborative problem-solving.” – Shreya Mehta, Counsel at TD SYNNEX.

    “Moving from the courtroom to corporate boardrooms, I learned to switch between adversarial advocacy and collaborative problem-solving.” – Shreya Mehta, Counsel at TD SYNNEX.

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

    From completing your B.B.A LL.B from Symbiosis to pursuing an LL.M. at NYU, how has your academic journey influenced your perspective on law and policy in a global context?

    What began as a spontaneous decision to pursue law gradually evolved into a conscious and enduring passion. Studying law taught me to view it not merely as a fixed framework, but as an ever-evolving dialogue across jurisdictions. At Symbiosis, I built a strong foundation in core legal principles within the Indian context, and later, my time at NYU shaped and broadened my entire perspective about it. 

    My motivation to pursue a post-graduation degree was a bit different from a lot of students out there. After nearly eight years of work experience, I decided to pursue my LL.M. at NYU; not as a break, but as a deliberate step to step back, reflect, and re-engage with law in a global classroom. That year was transformative. That experience allowed me to appreciate how legal systems can be both deeply interconnected and strikingly different, particularly in the areas I focused on; technology governance, environmental and energy policy. I believe that it also instilled in me the belief that a lawyer today must not remain confined within national borders or existing judgments, but should be ready to question, reinterpret, and challenge what they encounter at every step. I am also convinced that cultural context significantly shapes the way law is interpreted and enforced. Hence, my academic path enabled me to learn law in a way that extends far beyond textbooks.

    What inspired you to specialize in environmental and energy policy, with a focus on emerging technologies, during your Master’s at NYU? How did that experience enhance your understanding and practice of these areas?

    The real catalyst for my interest came during my time with the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance at the University of Cambridge. While researching the sustainability challenges of crypto-assets, I realized that what seemed like a niche question- whether blockchain-based assets could ever be environmentally sustainable- was in fact a window into a much larger set of issues around climate change, sustainable development, and the governance of emerging technologies. Over those nine months, I found myself asking bigger questions: how do we balance innovation with responsibility, and what role should law and policy play in steering that balance?

    When I decided to pursue further study, I chose the U.S. very intentionally. It has been a leader in both clean technology and regulatory innovation, and I knew that immersing myself in such an environment would challenge me and give me the global perspective I needed. NYU was the natural choice because of its emphasis on international and interdisciplinary learning. At NYU, seminars and courses such as Environmental & Energy Law Colloquium, and Law and Global Governance, allowed me to engage with both theoretical and practical dimensions of these challenges. I learned from professors who are at the forefront of global policy debates and worked alongside peers who brought perspectives from every continent. These interactions helped me see the intricate linkages between technology governance and environmental goals in a way that was both global and deeply contextual.

    That experience did more than just enrich my knowledge; it sharpened my conviction. I came away believing that solving climate and energy challenges will require not only technological innovation, but also robust legal governance frameworks that can adapt to the pace of change. It was at Cambridge where the spark was lit, but it was at NYU where that spark turned into a sustained commitment to work at this intersection.

    Early in your career, what were some of the most formative experiences, and how have you integrated those lessons into your professional practice?

    My most formative years were the initial three years, which were spent as a litigating lawyer under the mentorship of Mr. Anupam Srivastava (now Senior Advocate). For those three years, I had the privilege of working on a wide spectrum of matters across the High Court of Delhi, ranging from high-stakes political cases to civil disputes and recovery suits. Those experiences shaped me into the lawyer I am today. The environment was demanding yet enriching; drafting petitions, appearing before different courts, and learning to think on my feet. I entered litigation with stage fright, but my seniors’ trust and belief in me from the very first day when he handed me a file and asked me to argue before a registrar, is something that helped me as a young lawyer. Today, when I look back, that moment and many similar ones in those three years helped me shed my fear and find my voice as an advocate.

    I believe that the lessons I gained from my mentors and seniors during those years have stayed with me throughout my career. The discipline of drafting in litigation helps me today when I negotiate and draft million-dollar contracts or company-wide policies at a Fortune 500 IT distribution company. The advocacy skills I mastered in court helped me adapt seamlessly at NYU, where the Socratic method requires you to engage, challenge, and defend ideas in real time. I owe much of my professional growth to those early years and to the mentorship I received in that chamber, and they continue to anchor me, along with my work, and give me confidence as I navigate newer, global domains of law and policy even today.

    You’ve navigated diverse legal domains, from litigation and corporate law to compliance and emerging technology regulations. How do you adapt your approach when moving across such varied fields?

    Litigation gave me the strongest toolkit a lawyer can ask for; clarity of thought, precision in drafting, and the ability to argue under pressure. These skills are transferable across every legal domain I have since navigated. Whether drafting a court petition, negotiating a transaction, or shaping Data Privacy or AI governance frameworks, the process is similar- understand the facts, identify the risks, and build persuasive solutions.

    What changes is the context, and that is where adaptability comes in. Moving from the courtroom to corporate boardrooms, I learned to switch between adversarial advocacy and collaborative problem-solving. Litigation instilled resilience and meticulousness in me, and corporate practice taught me pragmatism and strategy. The combination of both makes me comfortable navigating even uncharted and new territories like digital assets or AI regulation, even after years of practice.

    While managing legal and policy functions at a cryptocurrency trading platform and later at Yellow.ai, what were some of the most challenging regulatory or compliance issues you faced in the digital assets and AI space?

    In the digital assets space, I faced regulatory ambiguity, which was new from what I was practicing before. When I started working for a cryptocurrency startup, digital asset regulations were not even at the nascent stage; everything was fragmented across jurisdictions, and mostly contradictory. The challenge was to build robust compliance structures in a grey zone, ensuring innovation without regulatory backlash- worldwide. Whereas at Yellow.ai, the challenge shifted to AI-driven business models, where data privacy, AI ethics, and regulatory uncertainty required foresight. Here, I guess, approaching every issue systematically, anticipating risks, and preparing strong documentation and frameworks to withstand scrutiny helped a lot. 

    From litigation to working in fast-growing tech spaces, the change was quite different, but as I mentioned, the approach remained similar, and these experiences taught me that in emerging fields, lawyers must not only interpret law but also actively shape it through dialogue with regulators and industry stakeholders.

    In your current focus on data privacy, AI governance, and sustainability laws, what shifts have you observed in these areas, and how do you navigate these evolving dynamics?

    Currently, I look after Data Privacy & Protection, AI Legal Governance, and Sustainability Laws for an IT distribution giant across the Asia-Pacific Japan region. The scale itself is humbling; advising a multinational with thousands of employees and partners requires not just legal expertise, but also cultural sensitivity, strategic alignment, and the ability to anticipate risks in markets that are at very different stages of regulatory maturity.

    This role is a stark departure from my earlier years in litigation and tech startups, but the contrast has been invaluable. While litigation sharpened my advocacy and analytical skills, working with startups trained me to be agile in ambiguous regulatory spaces. Now, in a corporate environment of this size, the challenge is about building governance structures that are both robust and scalable.

    The biggest shift I’ve observed is the fine balance between principles and accountability. In Data Protection & Privacy, this means embedding privacy by design into products, processes, and systems, instead of treating it as an afterthought. In AI Governance, the conversation is rapidly moving from broad ethical principles to concrete, enforceable frameworks like the EU AI Act, where businesses must demonstrate active risk management and transparency. And, in Sustainability, voluntary ESG disclosures are giving way to mandatory reporting requirements, with investors, regulators, and even consumers demanding credible, data-backed commitments.

    To navigate this evolving landscape, I rely on two approaches. First, I lean on the structured thinking that my litigation and academic experiences instilled in me; fact-finding, risk assessment, and precise documentation are my constant go-to. Second, I draw on my corporate and policy exposure to design governance frameworks that don’t just tick regulatory boxes but align meaningfully with business goals, enabling companies to remain compliant while still innovating and growing.

    Looking ahead, I believe the role of lawyers in these domains will become increasingly proactive. We are no longer just interpreters of the law; rather, we are architects of governance, guiding organizations through uncharted territories where law, policy, and technology converge.

    Having worked at the intersection of environmental law, corporate governance, and emerging technologies, what trends do you see shaping the future of legal practice in these areas?

    I believe the practice of law in my area is moving toward a far more anticipatory and integrated role than it has been in the past. Instead of being called upon to interpret rules once they are in force, lawyers are already and will increasingly be involved in shaping how those rules are designed, tested, and embedded into business strategy from the outset. In my view, this is especially true for fields like data protection, AI governance, and sustainability, where the pace of innovation is far faster than the pace of regulation.

    Another change I see is the growing expectation that lawyers act as translators, not only of law into practice, but of complex issues across various disciplines. For example, when discussing sustainability with the management of a company, the lawyer will not only have to explain reporting requirements, but also connect them to investor risk, technology adoption, and long-term corporate resilience. That level of cross-disciplinary fluency is going to define successful practitioners in the coming decade.

    Also, the global-local tension will only deepen as we are witnessing. We may see convergence in certain areas, like sustainability disclosures, but fragmentation will persist in fields like data protection and A.I regulations. Lawyers of the future will therefore need to be not just regulators’ watchdogs, but strategic advisors, who can help organizations craft governance frameworks that are both globally coherent and locally responsive.

    In short, I see the role of the lawyer evolving from interpreter of law to designer of governance, someone who not only ensures compliance but also helps businesses earn trust, stay resilient, and lead responsibly in uncertain times.

    What advice would you give to young lawyers seeking to build multidisciplinary expertise across litigation, corporate practice, and global regulatory policy?

    If I were to give one piece of advice, it would be to start with litigation if you get the chance. Those years in the courtroom gave me the strongest foundation: clarity of thought, discipline in drafting, and confidence in advocacy. As mentioned above, I still draw on those skills every single day, whether I am negotiating deals, drafting contracts, or shaping governance frameworks for global companies. Beyond that, I would encourage young lawyers to stay curious and not box themselves into one practice area too early. The legal profession today rewards breadth as much as depth, and a non-linear career path is not a weakness- it is rather a strength. Every shift, whether from litigation to corporate advisory or from startups to global policy, adds another dimension to your skillset and makes you a more resilient lawyer. And I cannot overstate the importance of mentors. I was fortunate to have seniors early in my career who trusted me and gave me real opportunities, and that faith shaped my confidence and growth. Seek out mentors who challenge and guide you, and be willing to learn from every opportunity, no matter how small it seems at the time.

    With such a diverse portfolio and responsibilities, how do you maintain personal well-being and work-life balance? Are there any particular strategies or resources you rely on?

    For me, balance has never been about drawing a hard line between work and personal life; it’s about weaving them together in a way that feels organic in my day-to-day life. I have found that movement is my best anchor. Whether it’s an early morning workout or a long evening walk to clear my head, those moments give me the energy and mental space to reset. They are often when I do my best thinking, away from screens and meetings.

    I also try to pick up new hobbies from time to time, something completely outside the legal world. Recently, it has been experimenting with different dance forms and cooking. Having something creative to turn to reminds me that my identity is bigger than my work, and it helps me keep perspective when deadlines pile up. It was early in my career, I learned how easily work can take over every waking hour if you let it. Now I’m intentional about boundaries. I’ll close my laptop at a certain time, put my phone away during dinner with family and friends, and make sure weekends have at least one pocket of time just for me. These small choices add up eventually- I have come to see well-being not as a luxury, but as a professional necessity.

    Get in touch with Shreya Mehta –

  • Crafting a Cross-Border Legal Career: Lessons from Public Policy and Arbitration – Sudhanshu Roy, Senior Associate at Foley Hoag LLP, United States.

    Crafting a Cross-Border Legal Career: Lessons from Public Policy and Arbitration – Sudhanshu Roy, Senior Associate at Foley Hoag LLP, United States.

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

    To start with, why and how did you choose law as your career? And if there was any specific inspiration or anything that you feel made the change in your mindset to choose law, being in India, having those kinds of challenges, we would request you to share those insights with us.

    In response to your specific question, I do recognize—having grown up in India, having spent almost the first 28, 29 years of my life in India—that, at least when I was growing up, law and the study of law were not seen as a very attractive career option.

    Let me put it very simply: people were more interested, as I recall, in studying the sciences, engineering, medicine, and architecture. Those kinds of professions were seen as more lucrative and more rewarding, from what I recall growing up.

    So, law was definitely not an attractive career option. Having said that, I was someone who was always interested in the study of social sciences, in the study of politics. You could say that that’s something that was bestowed upon me by my father, who is a professor of history. He is basically a social sciences academician himself. I was always surrounded by these books that were in the house—about world history, about ancient history, Greek history, Roman history, Indian history obviously. So, I used to be very fascinated by reading those books. Those used to be like coffee table books, from what I remember.

    My father used to bring them a lot. There used to be encyclopedias, so I was always interested in politics and history. And although I was a good student in science and maths as well, I always wanted to do something more related to how our society works, how our social systems work, how our political institutions work.

    And by the time I entered high school, I realized that studying law was probably the best way to understand it, because the law governs most of our political and social institutions. That was my motivation. I did not have any specific role models growing up, although I knew very well as a student of history that most of our leaders during the freedom movement—not only in India but almost all around the world—were lawyers. I realized that there must be something about the study of law that makes good leaders, that makes these leaders, these very cherished leaders of not just our freedom movement, as I said, but if you take the history of any country.

    You will see that most of the people who have risen to the top have studied law in some form or the other. So that was my interest, and that’s why I ended up being a lawyer. I did not have any specific branches or any specific disciplines in law in mind when I entered the legal profession. I just wanted to understand how, as I said, our society and our political institutions were.

    And that’s how I ended up being a lawyer.

    You were also equally interested in politics and that made the way towards law career because yes, all over the world, most of the politicians and leaders are lawyers also, and really in every country they have brought in a lot of changes. So was that the reason that you started your career from a leading Indian law firm which was specially focused on trade policies and government affairs. And later you also served as legal advisor to the Department of Economic Affairs, government of India.

    How did you end up there? First, my curiosity is that, and another thing, how did that form your perspective towards moving ahead and getting into international practice?

    That’s obviously a very relevant question that your listeners might be interested in hearing about.

    So, as I said, I did not have a specific practice of law in mind—whether it’s international law or arbitration, or litigation or transactions—when I started my life as a law student, because, from what I recall, in those days we did not even have this kind of information about the various disciplines and branches of law and the various types of legal practices or law firms. I started studying law in 2003, and the internet and the information age at that time were very much in its infancy. 

    I was just fascinated, as I said, by the concept of law and how we make laws, how the Parliament makes laws, how our Council of Ministers works, how the Cabinet works, from what sources they derive their powers—things like that. I did not have anything in mind, but as I started my student journey, there were a couple of events that shaped my career towards a more international practice.

    The first was that, you know, at that time—and I think even now—as law students, we do a lot of moot courts. So I was given an opportunity to do a moot court that was an international moot court on WTO Law. And this was organized by the European Students’ Law Association, ELSA, and our team at that time qualified for the world finals that were held in Geneva. I think this was in 2006. So I went to Geneva and argued before a tribunal a case that was related to the WTO, or the World Trade Organization, and the various laws that constitute that organization.

    I think that was a very prominent factor in shaping my career because I realized that law doesn’t just govern our national institutions but also governs international institutions—how countries trade with each other. There are defined, specific rules about how you trade, how much subsidies you can grant, what kinds of duties you can impose, what kinds of anti-dumping and countervailing measures a country can undertake against another country. I realized that law as a discipline is far broader than I thought, and I was just fascinated by the international aspect of it.

    And then, I think we had a professor at some point in my university career who was a professor from the University of Vienna. He was a professor in international law and a visiting professor for a semester. I developed a very close relationship with that professor who came to our university and taught us public international law, and he basically served as a mentor at that time in shaping, again, my career and my understanding of public international law.

    Again, public international law governs how states interact with each other on the international sphere. So that was again a very big motivating factor. So I think those two factors shaped my understanding of this international practice that I developed. And then we had specializations at that time.

    In our university, they used to have honors courses, so I chose an honors course in international law and trade. And that is how I specialized in what I do right now. And that is also how I ended up joining Amarchand in 2009. Amarchand had a very small practice of trade policy and government affairs, which was focused towards, again, working with the Government of India—obviously in Delhi—but also with other governments around the world on how they negotiate trade agreements, how they negotiate bilateral investment treaties.

    I joined that practice, and I can answer more, but that’s how I ended up at Amarchand. And one thing led to the other, and I’ve been doing this for almost 15, 16 years.

    Wow, that’s an amazing journey. You later pursued your LLM at the prestigious NYU School of Law and received notable scholarships like Vanderbilt and Inlaks. What do you think helped you secure these, was it your work, your clarity of purpose, or your passion for international law? How did these recognitions shape your professional path? And how have they contributed to establishing you as a prominent international law practitioner today?

    Again, a very relevant question. I did my stint with Amarchand & Mangaldas in New Delhi. Then, as I said, I moved on to the Government of India, where I worked as an in-house lawyer in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, helping the government again negotiate bilateral investment treaties, free trade agreements, as well as manage disputes with foreign investors.

    So I had that kind of experience, and when you’re in the government, the government works with all kinds of people—whether they’re lawyers, policymakers, or people in international institutions. So I interacted with people from all around the world when I was working as an in-house legal counsel in the Ministry of Finance. And that shaped my thinking in terms of taking up advanced study of international law, because I realized that international law is a very academic discipline—perhaps more academic than other disciplines—because you need to write a lot.

    There’s a lot of critical research and critical thinking. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen in other branches of law, but in international law, perhaps it happens a lot more. So I realized that I needed an advanced degree because it was a very academic discipline, based on my interactions with the people that I met at that time.

    So yeah, I applied to a lot of universities. I was accepted into many universities—Harvard, Columbia, and Berkeley. But I ended up choosing NYU because I think New York is the hub, the center, probably the global center of international arbitration as a practice. And that is what I was interested in.

    And I also received this very prestigious scholarship, which you just mentioned—the Vanderbilt Scholarship at NYU—which covered a lot of my tuition and expenses. And I received that scholarship because I think I had a very clear sense of purpose about what I wanted to do. I think these kinds of scholarships are awarded by universities to people who are keen to learn, who absolutely show in their applications that they’re going to be at the university—it’s a very short time, the LLM is only for a year—so in that one year, they’re there to actually learn something new, and then utilize the instruction that they received or the education they received to do something more meaningful. So I think I was able to very clearly explain in my application what I wanted to do—not just with my time at NYU for a year, but beyond that. 

    I was also awarded another scholarship in India, which is called the Inlaks Scholarship, I think, which is also very prominent. And from what I recall, I was able to bring forth to the selection committee for that scholarship as well how my career in law had been up until that point, what were the kinds of things that I hadn’t done, and what it was that I wanted to do beyond my LLM at NYU. And I think they were also very, very impressed by the fact that I had worked in the government for about two and a half, three years, because that’s not something very common—especially if you are working in a big Indian law firm.

    Most people generally move to another law firm or do something else—they don’t generally go to work for the government or take a pay cut. So I think I was able to explain that I went to the government because I think in international arbitration, if you see, one of the biggest defendants—one of the entities that is sued the most—I mean, it’s obviously common in domestic litigation as well, but in the international sphere too, governments are sued and also sue very often. The government is a huge, huge stakeholder in the international arbitration system—not just the Government of India, but governments around the world. I again wanted to understand from the institutional perspective: what are the priorities, what are the policy interests that governments have in these kinds of disputes?

    And I also knew that there are lots of law practices, especially in the West—in the United States and in Europe—that are focused on the defense of sovereign governments in these kinds of disputes. I knew that if I worked in-house as a government lawyer, that experience could help me find a career at an international law firm or an international institution which values that kind of experience. Again, all of this was brought forth, probably in my application, which is why I was lucky enough to be selected for these scholarships.

    And then I had a great time at NYU, and after that I joined Foley Hoag, which—as I think was explained in the introduction—is an international law firm which specializes in the defense of sovereign states and state-owned entities in international arbitration and international litigation. So that is the kind of work I do. When I was in India, I obviously did a lot of work for the Government of India, but now I’ve done work for governments all around the world.

    I can name a few—I’ve defended Croatia, Ecuador, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, Thailand, Nepal, Mauritius. There are so many countries around the world that I’ve been fortunate enough to work for and defend.

    So I think I am still very much a student and a learner, but what I’ve been able to do is utilize my experience that I obtained while I was in India—working in a law firm and in the government—and now I’m applying and using that experience to further and broaden my legal career and legal perspectives beyond just India.

     After listening to you, I cannot stop myself, but ask, as I understand learners will also be very much interested, that how did you make move from one of the top law firm private practice to the government of India work because it’s not easy transition and you do not get such kind of work or as a legal counsel, you do not get appointed without having certain amount of experience, the kind of portrayal of your practice, what was the process that you followed maybe that will help our learners?

    And next, like you explained that I wanted to get into international arbitration and international law, by then you had already decided. How helpful was being with the government of India? Not only to get the scholarships, but also get the right kind of subjects being chosen?

    Because as far as I understand, LLMs, you choose as many subjects as possible in the US, and you are allowed to have a lot of interactive subjects also. So how did you do that? How helpful was your stint with the government of India in doing all of this?

    It was very, very helpful to put it mildly.

    I don’t think I’d be where I am today if not for my experience with the Government of India. Now, as I said, it’s not a common transition from private law firm practice to the government, and it’s not an easy transition. But as I explained a while ago, at Amarchand we were already working with the government and various government institutions on things like negotiation of free trade agreements, negotiation of bilateral investment treaties.

    We were also working on various law reform initiatives. I remember, at that time, we were working, for example, with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on the redrafting of the legislation called the Societies Registration Act 1860. From what I remember—I don’t know if that’s been done—but those are the kinds of things we were working on.

    I was already very familiar with government institutions in my work as a private lawyer with Amarchand. And that also was not a very common practice. But we had set this up in Amarchand with a very small team, just three people, and we were doing this kind of government public policy work.

    I was already very familiar with government institutions, and what happened was that the government at that time was facing a lot of these international disputes. It was receiving notices from a lot of multinational companies, which had grievances and disputes with regard to various measures that the government—not just the Government of India, but also various state governments and local governments—had undertaken.

    The people, the relevant powers that be in the government, were very familiar with our firm and very familiar with me and my work. They liked what they saw, and they felt that they needed someone not as an external—I mean, of course they would hire external lawyers—but they also needed someone in-house to manage these disputes and manage these treaty negotiations for them.

    And they really liked my profile because at that time I was quite new, relatively new. And they needed someone who was a doer, who was a worker, who could actually sit and draft things. And they probably liked my passion for international law and international arbitration.

    It’s not something that I actively sought, but it was something that I was offered—a chance. And this was, again, not very common even for the government, because as you know, in the government they don’t generally hire people from outside. I know there are some initiatives that have been taken in the last four or five years where they have hired people, but in 2013, there were virtually no people from outside being hired.

    There were a few people hired as consultants. But I think those were people who were retired or had a very significant amount of experience—which in my case, there was not, because I had barely three or four years of experience. It was a very significant and groundbreaking initiative undertaken by the ministry at that time to hire an external, young professional, which was me at that time.

    And they offered me the opportunity. I did not actively seek it. And that’s how I ended up there—because they were very familiar with my work, and I think they saw me as the right person who was going to be managing these cases for the government. And I managed all kinds of disputes with foreign investors generally, because the Ministry of Finance at that time—there was a body which has been abolished by now—but it was called the Foreign Investment Promotion Board.

    And the Foreign Investment Promotion Board was responsible at that time for the entry and admission of all foreign investors in India. So I used to work with that cell, managing disputes with foreign investors—whether it was before domestic courts or whether it was an international dispute. And so that’s how I ended up there.

    And again, I think that was a very relevant experience because, as I already said, in international arbitration—especially when you’re talking about investor-state arbitration—it’s literally called “investor-state.” One party is the investor; the other party is the state. Working for the state is a very, very relevant experience that any young professional can have, and I would encourage people to get that experience, especially if you’re keen in this field, because 50% of the dispute is about the state, and 50% is about the investor. You get a wide perspective about how state institutions work, what the policy priorities are—things like that. I gained that relevant experience and then used it to advance my career in the ways that I could at that time.

     You have represented, as you said, many, many sovereign and private clients across the globe within arbitral work.   In your view, what kind of procedures do you look forward to, or what kind of strategic restrictions have you seen while working with these kinds of forums in different jurisdictions? How do you see those differences and how your study in India and your study as an LLM student in the US has shaped your understanding and has helped you build such procedures, such strategic points to develop those drafts?

    Because they are the only ones which we are privy to and we learn from those. So how have you worked towards these concepts and aspects to make sure that it is understandable by the layman I would say? Also how do you make sure that governments make it easier for the society, in any jurisdiction whatsoever you have worked with?

    Each case, each country, as you said, it’s very different. I mean, obviously there are certain common international law rules and standards which all states have to abide by.

    There are certain normative standards in any international treaty—whether it’s a bilateral treaty or a multilateral treaty—there are common standards that have to be followed, whether it’s by the state or by a foreign investor, whether it’s by an international institution or individuals.

    That is there. But I think what I’ve learned is that each case and each dispute, in your capacity as a practitioner—probably if you practice dispute resolution in any form—you would’ve realized and understood that each case is different.

    I think it’s about understanding and applying the specific facts of each case, because these are complex disputes. The moment a state is involved in a dispute, it gets more complicated than any other private dispute, because when you’re talking about a state—and let’s take the example of India, or we could take the example of any state, honestly, in my view—even a small state, like a small country, relatively small like Mauritius, because I’ve done a lot of cases for the Government of Mauritius, it’s an island. But the government in any country is a very large machinery. It’s probably one of the largest employers. It has many organs, it has many departments, ministries, and the government under international law is not just the central government, the federal government. Under international law, state responsibility arises not just for the actions of the government at the central level, but also at the state level, also at the municipal level. Any actor, any person who’s acting on behalf of the state or exercising governmental authority—the actions of such a person or entity—can give rise to state responsibility under international law.

    So what you’re dealing with is a very large and complicated institutional mechanism. You have to understand how it works, and it works in different ways in each system, each country. Now, there are certain common threads. For example, one common thread that I’ve learned in all of these cases is that each government has an interest in protecting its policy space, protecting its regulatory space.

    So, for example, one of the earliest cases that I did while I was here in Foley Hoag was a case for the government of— I mean, I was not directly involved in that case, but I know of that case. We did a case for the Government of Uruguay. And this case was a challenge by a very big international tobacco company called Philip Morris against the laws that were passed by the Government of Uruguay mandating that all cigarette packets should only have plain packaging—like you cannot have any advertisements or logos or any form of branding on a cigarette package that is out for sale in a supermarket or in a shop. And I think, for example, India also has some kind of similar laws, because you need to display on a very wide and big scale on any cigarette pack that it’s injurious for health. And you have all these kinds of gross photos and everything that show what cigarette smoking can lead to.

    So foreign investors—not just in Uruguay, but I’m aware that in other countries around the world—also challenge those kinds of actions because they said that it is an attack on their intellectual property, because as manufacturers, they have a right to advertise and to display their brand on cigarette packets.

    But the government’s position was that no, this is something that is undertaken in public interest. This is something that is undertaken to protect public health, because the government has an interest in protecting the health and environment of a wider degree of population. So the argument is that the public interest of the state in promoting health and promoting the non-use of cigarettes takes precedence over the intellectual property rights of a foreign investor. So that’s the tension. That was the tension in that dispute.

    So, as I said, all governments have some sort of policy interest and regulatory interest that they want to protect. And whenever that clashes with the interest of the commercial—mostly commercial—interest of the foreign investor, that gives rise to disputes.

    And that is the challenge that you have to understand in each case. Each case has different facts, and you have to first understand the facts—what are you dealing with? And then obviously, there are certain common standards and norms that you have to apply to those facts.I think that’s the challenge that I faced in every case or every dispute that I handled.

    You are also admitted to the bar of Washington DC, New York, and New Delhi as well, which is in itself an achievement. How has this multi-jurisdictional licensing for yourself helped your legal practice? And how do you see that managing all of these demanding practices across different legal systems has helped you not only understand as a person how much you can influence public policy making, especially keeping in mind your strength in India and the way you are working internationally as well. We would request you to share some nuggets about those so that we can understand how one can plan their future the way you have done?

    Firstly, let me take a step back. If you want to practice as a lawyer in the United States, you have to be admitted to the bar. So I don’t think it’s something very revolutionary. I mean, you have to pass an exam, which I think is a very tricky exam. I’m not gonna say that it’s a tough or a difficult exam—it’s quite tricky because it’s quite unlike what students of India must be used to taking in the form of exams.

    It’s a very practically oriented exam, and it’s an exam that is focused more on your legal writing and your practical skills—bringing out your practical skills as a lawyer. So you have to pass that exam to be able to practice as a lawyer in the United States, like it is the case in India.

    I passed that exam, which, as I said, was a very tricky and different kind of exam. And then, when you practice as an international arbitration lawyer, you practice in various jurisdictions—because it’s literally international. The dispute or the parties or the elements of the case could be from anywhere around the world, which is why I am also admitted in DC, because Washington, DC is a very relevant jurisdiction. We have the World Bank here, we have the DC Circuit Court and the DC District Court where a lot of these lawsuits by foreign investors are filed—whether it’s for the enforcement of awards or whether it’s for set-aside.

    I think, as an international arbitration lawyer, you have to have a very international profile, and it always makes sense to be admitted and recognized in these various jurisdictions so that people know about your profile. That also helps with attracting more work, and people again know about you.

    And so that’s why I’m not just admitted in DC, but for example, I’m also—I think it was mentioned in the introduction I’m a fellow of the Malaysian Institute of Arbitrators. So again, what I try to do is cast a very wide net, because in terms of building my international profile, it’s very important that I am visible and present in various jurisdictions—and which is why I’m admitted.

    Thank you so much. I know it’s very important to be admitted to the bar just to practice, but as you’ve said, it’s very tricky in the US unlike to what we are accustomed in India, there is a huge difference between the way we take this here and how it is there, so definitely it’s a super achievement. I want to say. Although it’s mandatory, it’s still a big achievement.

    But I just wanted to add one more thing for people who may listen to this interview. I don’t know how many people would, but if you want to practice and come here in the US, one very, very important thing—as lawyers in India, at least from the time that I was studying—is that there’s a significant amount of difference in legal writing. I mean, the US is also a very common law-based system. Although it’s developed in a very unique way, India is still very rooted and very similar to how the English legal system has traditionally been. But the US is also a common law system.

    So, understanding the laws here and understanding how institutions work is not an issue, but the practice of law—the practical aspect of practicing law—is very, very different. I do not think, and I do not recall from my time in India, whether it was as a student or a practitioner, devoting enough attention to and developing my skills as a writer.

    But as opposed to that, in the US, writing is probably the most important skillset you will have as a lawyer. Of course, oral advocacy is important, and in India, I think we are very good oral advocates. We are brilliant orators, and we are good debaters. That is something that comes naturally.

    But I don’t think there’s enough attention paid to legal writing. I think even the bar exam is a test of your legal writing skills, because I think there’s one day—from what I recall now, this is 10 years ago—but one day is devoted specifically to writing essays. And in India, I remember when I used to write essays in exams, it was all about filling the number of pages. You just write as many pages as you can in the shortest time possible and cite as many cases as you can. If you do that in the US, you’re most certainly going to fail. There is absolutely no doubt. The professor or the evaluator is not even going to read your paper.

    They’re going to throw it away in the bin. So it’s not about filling the pages—it’s really about being succinct. Being precise and being concise is very, very important. There’s a famous quote that “brevity is the soul of writing.” I don’t know who this quote is attributed to, but this is very, very important.

    Brevity is very important. In the US, you have to be able to write and convey things in a very simple, in a very layman sort of way. Unlike India, where we sometimes use these heavy proses, complex words, and very long paragraphs. That doesn’t sell. Even if you look at the judgments of the courts in India—sometimes we have Supreme Court judgments—I remember reading some of these constitutional law judgments of 500, 600 pages. I remember there was a case, a famous case called Indira Sawhney versus Union of India. This was a case on reservation. This was like some thousand pages. It was a very landmark case. But if you take a landmark case here in the US, written by the Supreme Court, it would no longer be more than 30, 40, 50 pages.

    So, if you want to come here and practice as a lawyer, think about developing your writing skills. Think about being concise. Think about being precise. And do not think about just filling in the number of pages, because then you’re going to not just do poorly in your master’s or whatever other legal studies you pursue, but also not do well on your bar exam.

    I think that’s a very important lesson that I learned—and I’m still learning—because it takes time to adapt between different legal systems.

    Thank you for honestly highlighting the need to unlearn and relearn, especially around precision in legal writing. As we near the end of this conversation, I’d like to ask, how have you managed your work-life balance while engaging in high-intensity arbitration, academic writing, and speaking at global forums? What practices have helped you maintain your mental, physical, and professional well-being? Could you share your checklist with our learners?

    That’s again a very relevant question. I think, especially in this age where there’s so much intense competition and there are obviously work pressures everywhere.

    I think that’s something I don’t think I’ve mastered, but I’m happy to share what I do. I’m still a learner, and I think most of us are learners. So, one thing that I certainly have is the capacity—the mental capacity—I’ve developed to be able to switch off and on. When I’m working, I’m fully focused on working, but I do know that at some point during the day or during the week, I’m not going to be working. So I have the capacity to switch off and focus on my personal life. I have a family, I have kids—I have two young boys—which I think helps. I’m not saying it’s going to be the same for everyone, but people could have different motivations and things to do in their personal lives.

    It could be a hobby, it could be anything, but I think it’s important to recognize that your life extends not just to your profession or your practice—it extends beyond that. There are important things beyond that. So I have the mental capacity to switch on and off, and it doesn’t take me a long time to do that.

    I’m very, very flexible, and fortunately, I mean, work is very intense, but my colleagues and my employers are very flexible in the sense that I can switch off at any time. For example, on a day when I do not have a lot of work and I have sufficient downtime, I can completely switch off and focus on my family—take my kids out to play soccer or football, as you call it in India—or do something with them, or just read a book or watch a movie.

    So I think I do that. The second thing I’ve very much learned—and I think this comes with age; for very young people, this may be difficult because you’re still trying to develop and establish yourself—but I think it’s very important to focus on your physical health, because we ignore that.

    I certainly have learned in the last, I would say, three, four, five years to focus on my physical health. I at least take out like 30 to 40 minutes in the day—not much, because you don’t get more than that—to just focus on my physical health. I get up early in the morning, do some sort of physical activity, eat the right kind of food. I think it’s very important, because sometimes as lawyers—I remember, especially when I started my career—we used to eat all kinds of junk food. I have realized, I think these are very small things, may sound insignificant, but again, all of it is connected and affects your mental health and your physical health.

    I think eating the right kind of food, getting enough sleep is very important. You will have days and you will have zones where you will not be able to do these kinds of things. For example, when I’m in a hearing—in arbitration, especially in international arbitration—hearings are held in a block.

    It’s not like in India where you have a court date, and then you get another date two months later, and then you come back. Our hearings are like 5- or 10-day hearings, and they’re held in a block, in a consecutive period. So, for example, when I’m in a hearing or preparing for a hearing, there would be two or three weeks when I’m not able to do any of this.

    When I’m not able to do any exercise, when I’m not focusing on eating the right kind of food, when I do not have any personal downtime. But that’s something that you have to accept, because it’s a very intense and demanding practice. And at the end of it, there is a reward.

    When you finish your hearing, when you finish these intense periods, then you know that you will get a downtime. So, you focus on that downtime, you work hard during that period, and then you switch off once that is over. I think switching on and off, eating the right kind of food, physical activity, and recognizing that there is a life and there are important things to do beyond the law and beyond your practice—

    I think these are the three or four things that I have recognized as important. That said, again, as I said, I’m still learning, and it’s not like I’m in peak physical health or anything, but mentally—I think also mentally—it’s very important. Sometimes mental health is ignored—I would say more in India than in the US.

    It’s very important that if you have an issue or if you have a challenge, you speak to your peers, you speak to your colleagues. You don’t hesitate to speak out. If you’re facing a particular issue in your workplace, you speak to your family. Don’t keep it within yourself.

    Don’t be lonely. I think go out and make friends, make acquaintances, and recognize that law is just—ultimately—it’s just a career, right? You know it’s going to get over at some point, and then you’re going to do something different. So find something different.

    That’s the challenge, I would say.

    Get in touch with Sudhanshu Roy –

  • “To protect intellectual property in businesses, companies should adopt a proactive IP strategy that includes identifying the IP in various products, securing protection through timely registration of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and designs early on.” – Geetanjali Visvanathan, Partner at Ira Law.

    “To protect intellectual property in businesses, companies should adopt a proactive IP strategy that includes identifying the IP in various products, securing protection through timely registration of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and designs early on.” – Geetanjali Visvanathan, Partner at Ira Law.

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

    With nearly 16 years of distinguished experience in the legal field, what initially motivated you to pursue a career in law? Which aspects of the profession have resonated with you the most, and how did your time in law school contribute to shaping your legal journey?

    My taking up law as a career path was unexpected, considering that I had taken up science in 12th standard. While preparing for various entrance examinations, I was introduced to a book on law by my dad. The questions there sparked my curiosity, and I loved how everything was reason and logic based, which prompted me to pursue law.

    Law School provided a crucial foundation. I participated in moot courts during my college days, where I discovered the excitement of building a case, researching legal propositions, advocating and thinking from either side, and arguing the case before judges, which is ultimately what shaped my choices after law school. 

    Having completed your LL.M. at New York University with a focus on Competition, Innovation, and Information Law, what factors influenced your decision to choose this particular program and university? How has your experience at NYU shaped your career, and how has this advanced degree contributed to your professional growth?

    Having started my career in a top tier Intellectual Property Law firm, I always wanted to pursue an LL.M. in the same field. As NYU was offering an integrated course covering these subjects, I knew that was the right course for me given the new legal challenges that we face in the ecosystem of rapidly changing technologies. 

    My experience at NYU was extremely rewarding as it afforded me the opportunity to engage with lawyers from diverse backgrounds and jurisdictions. 

    At the outset of your career, you worked with a renowned firm. What were the key experiences during this time that significantly enhanced your understanding of the law, and how did these early experiences help shape your career trajectory? 

    I was fortunate to have had a diverse portfolio of matters early in my career which provided me with better and practical understanding of the various IP laws. Each case I worked on and every mistake I made were valuable learning experiences that contributed to my growth.

    I vividly remember my first case, which centered around infringement of an iconic and classic Bollywood film. Attention to detail in the documents proved pivotal in securing a favorable order for us – a learning that I have carried along till date. Similarly, each day in court is a new experience, which has helped me grow, and continues to teach me something new every single day. 

    With your extensive experience in negotiating and drafting music licensing agreements, how do you approach negotiations with international platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music, and TikTok? What challenges do varying jurisdictions present in these types of negotiations, and how do you navigate them?

    My approach to any negotiation, not just for music agreements, is to understand the four key elements of the deal and of the partners involved i.e. Who, What, Why, and How.

    First, identifying the ‘Who’ involves studying the counterparties and their role in the negotiation. For music licensing, this could be a music publisher, record label, or tech platform, each approaches a negotiation differently. 

    Next, understanding ‘What’ entails grasping the underlying technology or platform, including what the usage of music is like and what are the business needs and objectives of my client.

    The ‘Why’ pertains to why and for what purpose the legal rights are needed, such as copyright, mechanical rights, or sync or publishing licenses.

    Lastly, recognizing ‘How’ involves aligning the deal with your client’s business needs and objectives.

    By comprehensively addressing these factors, I have been able to navigate the complexities of music licensing negotiations.

    As a legal advisor to major media and entertainment clients like T-Series, how do you balance intellectual property protection with the evolving legal landscape surrounding IP in the entertainment sector?

    As outside counsel, it’s essential to align my thinking with the client’s objectives while ensuring compliance with the law. Technology is dynamic and constantly evolving and hence, the only solution is to deliver innovative, out-of-the-box solutions that bridge the gap between intellectual property law and the business needs of a client.

    Given your substantial expertise in advising clients on privacy and information technology laws, how do you evaluate the impact of India’s rapidly expanding digital economy on privacy regulations and intermediary liability issues?

    India’s growing digital economy presents both exciting opportunities and significant challenges in the areas of privacy and intermediary liability. As the country moves toward greater digitization, the sheer volume of personal data being generated and processed has increased multifold. This growth puts more pressure on privacy regulations to ensure that individuals’ personal information is adequately protected from misuse. There is also a greater need to ensure effective regulation in relation to collection, storage and sharing of personal information by various entities. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 addresses some of these concerns on paper but only time will tell how the Act protects personal data.

    Regarding intermediary liability, digital platforms like social media, e-commerce, and content-sharing services face greater scrutiny nowadays on their role in regulating user-generated content. India’s digital economy requires privacy laws that are flexible and proactive, as well as clear guidelines on intermediary liability to ensure that platforms operate responsibly while fostering growth in the digital sector.

    With your experience in managing and leading teams of lawyers, what do you believe are the most essential qualities for driving strategic decision-making in complex legal matters, particularly those involving emerging technologies and cross-border negotiations? 

    The most essential qualities are a solid grounding in legal fundamentals, staying current with evolving laws and technologies, the ability to distill relevant facts from complexity, and strong teamwork and communication skills to align all stakeholders effectively.

    What advice would you offer to law students aspiring to build a career like yours, particularly in the fields of intellectual property and data protection? What skills or qualities do you consider crucial for success in these areas, and how can aspiring legal professionals best prepare for this path?

    My advice is to know the ABCs of the law you intend to practice. Don’t be afraid to make mistakes—just make sure you learn from them. Stay curious, not just about changes in Indian law but also global developments and never hesitate to ask questions. Attention to detail and analytical thinking are key. No one is perfect, but if you can harness these skills with consistency and a willingness to grow, you’ll be well on your way.

    Drawing from your extensive experience in resolving high-stakes litigation, what intellectual property strategies would you recommend to businesses particularly in the technology sector seeking to protect their IP while navigating the complex legal landscape in India?

    To protect intellectual property in businesses, companies should adopt a proactive IP strategy that includes identifying the IP in various products, securing protection through timely registration of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and designs early on. Having regular IP audits and clear licensing policies and systems in place and lastly, monitoring infringement including initiating swift enforcement actions. 

    Get in touch with Geetanjali Visvanathan –

  • “In terms of latest trends – I think AI and its impact in different sectors and the legal nuances surrounding that would definitely be something over the next five and ten years.” – Shruti Iyer, Advocate-on-Record at Supreme Court of India and Partner at SA Law.

    “In terms of latest trends – I think AI and its impact in different sectors and the legal nuances surrounding that would definitely be something over the next five and ten years.” – Shruti Iyer, Advocate-on-Record at Supreme Court of India and Partner at SA Law.

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

    With your broad expertise in areas such as Insolvency Law, Competition Law, Administrative Law, and more, could you share the story of how you first embarked on your legal journey? What inspired you to choose law as a profession? Was it a deliberate decision, or did your passion for law evolve gradually over time?

    I did not think I would be a lawyer. So I’m a lawyer by chance but I’m glad that I pursued law because now that I think back I am sure it is my calling. I don’t think I could have been so happy doing anything else. As destiny would have it I got admission into ILS Law College, Pune and I can safely say that I spent the better part of my life there. I was fortunate to study under some excellent faculty like Dr. Jaya Sagade, Prof. Nilima Bhadbade and Prof. Smita Sabne to name a few. Their teachings and guidance have been invaluable to me. 

    You participated in the dual LLM program in Global Business Law at New York University School of Law and National University of Singapore. Could you kindly share your experiences during that time and also ponder upon how the program equipped you to navigate the complexities of international corporate and financial services law? What challenges did you encounter during the application process, and what impact did the Dean’s Award from New York University have on you?

    I think I was extremely fortunate to be part of the NYU-NUS Dual Masters’ Program. It was truly one of a kind and we used to joke that we were part of a “limited edition”. Unfortunately, the Dual program has stopped. But it was a brilliant experience.  It was very intensive and taxing to do two programs in one year because when one university was on break we would have the classes and exams for the other. But the faculty was top notch. We got to experience the best of both worlds and had a natural kind of insight into comparative law without even having that as an elective. There is often this debate about whether it is worth pursuing an LLM abroad if you want to come back and work in India and especially in Litigation and I would like to say that if you have the resources you should definitely pursue one. Personally I feel it broadened my horizons in ways I could not have imagined. The bonus is I made some lifelong friends. The Application process was very smooth. It was completely online and I don’t recollect any hassle.  The Dean’s Award definitely helped me financially to be able to afford the program

    In terms of learning, I was extremely fortunate to be able to do my dissertation on International Investment Law under Prof M. Sornarajah. At NUS I interacted and studied under some excellent faculty like Prof. Umakanth Varottil and Prof. Arun Thiruvengadam. For the NYU Program we had some legends like Prof. Jose Alvarez for International Investment Law and Prof Stephen Choi for M&A and Securities. There are so many things that I learned during the program which I am able to use in my practise today especially when it comes to subjects like Competition Law and International Arbitration Law , apart from principles of corporate and financial laws. 

    In the early stages of your career, you worked with a major corporation. How did you approach the legal intricacies surrounding the Copyright Act and Cable TV regulations during that period? What key takeaways from that experience helped shape the foundation of your career and propelled your professional trajectory?

     I was lucky to work with some major corporations so early on in my career. It was a great learning curve for me. I dealt with several issues under the Copyright Act and Cable TV Regulations which were very relevant at the time. More than that, it helps me now immensely while dealing with in – house clients. I understand their issues and try to resolve them to the best of my ability. 

    After gaining valuable experience working in-house, what prompted your decision to transition to litigation, working alongside Senior Advocates? How did you find the shift between the two environments, and what major differences stood out to you? 

    I had a great learning experience working in – house but I always felt I was missing out on attending court. So I decided to finish my masters and switch to litigation. At that time the thought was if I don’t like it I can always go back. But I took to litigation like a fish takes to water. I loved coming to court and still do. It is what drives me. I feel like we make a difference to our client’s lives in whatever small way possible and that gives me a sense of purpose and immense satisfaction. The shift was not difficult, both have its pros and cons. But the working culture is very different. While working in – house my deadline was often completing a draft or sending an email. In litigation we are racing against time to secure bail or stop a demolition. So we cannot compare. Both are invaluable learning experiences.

    I am immensely grateful to my seniors Mr. T. Srinivasa Murthy and Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan, who have been my Gurus and Mentors in this profession. I have literally learnt everything I know from them and I continue to work and learn from them. 

    After working with various legal entities, you went on to establish your own practice. What motivated you to take that leap, and what were some of the initial challenges you faced in setting up your own firm and how did you navigate them?

    I cleared the Advocate on Record Exam and became an AOR of the Supreme Court and felt that I could start something on my own so my Partner Anandh K and I set up SA Law. It is based on our philosophy of doing good work and helping our clients. When we work in some other organisation we are always bound by their rules. Setting up my own practise gives me the freedom to do what I want both professionally and personally. It also helps me do other activities like teaching or interacting with law students and doing pro bono work without any pressure. In terms of the challenges we faced- we are both first generation lawyers from outside Delhi. We don’t have any Godfathers here. We have struggled and grown brief by brief and survived by word of mouth of our clients who have trusted us. 

    As a Founding Partner at SA Law and an AOR, you oversee a variety of practice areas, including land acquisition, civil rights, POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment), arbitration, and competition law. Could you share a fascinating case you’ve handled in the field of competition law and how you approached the complexities of such a case, especially for our younger readers looking to understand this area of law?

     I think one of the biggest cases I have handled is the cement cartel case. The case is now pending before the Supreme Court. But I was fortunate to work on the case from the CCI stage to the appeals before erstwhile COMPAT and then NCLAT and now Supreme Court. Working on a case through all the stages is a great learning experience. I think one of the fascinating aspects of competition law is how much we rely on foreign judgments and concepts – both the US Anti-Trust Law and EU and also compare it with our own jurisprudence. I think my LLM came in very handy in dealing with this. 

    Your passion for teaching is evident in your contributions to judging moot courts, delivering guest lectures, and conducting seminars and workshops for law students. What advice would you give to aspiring lawyers who are just beginning their legal careers?

    I don’t think I can give much advice- there are far more learned people for that. I would say enjoy your time at law school. Most of them would be doing the 5 year law course. When I look back at my time in Law College – I just remember that I had fun. I participated in all the activities in college both curricular and extra-curricular. It helped me make so many friends. And maybe I would say use that time to read and write a lot. 5 years is a long time. It is ok if you don’t have 10 internships in 5 years or don’t do many moot courts or write research papers. Of course, doing all this helps. But utilise the time doing something. I spent a good amount of time doing Purshottam and Firodiya Karandak in Pune which had a big Marathi Theatre Scene. It helped me learn one more language which is a life skill and comes in handy even today. 

     Perhaps I would add one thing – it is very easy to be enamoured by the profession when we are in college – especially when we hear Senior Advocates or Judges come to our college and talk and advise youngsters to pursue litigation. There is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps even I would give the same advice. But the initial years are tough. It is sometimes very easy to feel dejected, especially if you fall in the trap of comparison. Social media doesn’t help. Litigation is a marathon with very slow returns and requires a lot of consistent effort. And sometimes, even after a lot of hard work you may not get material returns or recognition. And that is ok. As long as you are able to feel satisfied that you are doing some good work, you should be ok with that. There are many loopholes in the system, all the more for women, but there are many good people as well- whether in terms of seniors, peers or mentors – there is no dearth of good people who will help you both personally and professionally and I think the camaraderie of the Bar is one of the best parts of this profession. Last but definitely not the least – there is no substitute for hard work. You may keep hearing about networking and legacy and luck and it is very easy to get lost in this hubris but there are no shortcuts to success. 

    As someone dedicated to staying at the cutting edge of legal developments and inspiring your colleagues to do the same, what do you consider to be the key emerging trends in your areas of expertise, such as Intellectual Property and Competition Law, particularly with the rise of Artificial Intelligence and technological advancements? How do you stay informed about these evolving fields, and what direction do you see them taking over the next five to ten years? Additionally, could you suggest any resources for our readers to stay up to date on the latest legal trends?

    In terms of the latest trends – I think AI and its impact in different sectors and the legal nuances surrounding that would definitely be something over the next five and ten years. The other emerging trend is the DPDP Act and its enforcement and the complications that arise out of them. In terms of staying updated, I think there are way more resources now than we had, especially online resources. I would say the good old way of reading law reports is also invaluable. 

    How do you manage to balance your professional growth with your personal interests? What hobbies or activities do you enjoy that help you unwind and relax after a demanding day at work?

    I think we always try to balance and if someone says that they have figured it all out then perhaps they are lying. But I try. I recently gave birth to my second child.  So I am currently in the depths of everything postpartum, but I would say whatever time I have I like to spend with my children. 

    Get in touch with Shruti Iyer –

  • “Effective mentorship involves mutual respect, open communication, and practical insights. Aspiring legal professionals, remember: Pursue excellence and professionalism, and money will follow.” – Shruba Bhattacharya, Counsel at ivari Canada

    “Effective mentorship involves mutual respect, open communication, and practical insights. Aspiring legal professionals, remember: Pursue excellence and professionalism, and money will follow.” – Shruba Bhattacharya, Counsel at ivari Canada

    This interview has been published by Namrata Singh and The SuperLawyer Team

    Your career has taken you from India to Dubai and now to Toronto. Transitioning between legal landscapes and cultures can be both professionally and personally transformative. Can you share insights into your journey and how you navigated these transitions, both in terms of your legal practice and adapting to new environments?

    UAE opened up a new world of personal and professional opportunities. I moved to UAE with about few years of work experience from India and with god’s grace, I was quickly able to find a position in one of Abu Dhabi’s oldest law firms. Though I had apprehensions about moving from a common law hybrid jurisdiction to a civil law hybrid jurisdiction, however, none of my apprehensions came to fruition, as the firm had amazing people who were happy to help and guide me. The addition of ADGM and DIFC, which are common law jurisdictions also helped. On a personal front, our stint in UAE was amazing, we started our family and made lifelong friends. However, owing to the non-permanent transient nature of the stay in UAE, we chose to move out to Canada, where I did my masters and licensure and am presently a Counsel at ivari. I am blessed to be working with an amazing team and a very competent and compassionate General Counsel. Moving countries takes and restarting life, gets harder with time. However, an indomitable spirit, ability to adapt, ability to keep an open mind and resilience are key to success. 

    As Counsel at ivari, you provide legal guidance on insurance-related issues and collaborate with internal clients. Can you share a recent project or challenge you’ve worked on at Ivari that stands out, and how did you navigate it to achieve positive outcomes for the company?

    While I can leverage my past work experience and at present predominantly work on the corporate commercial side of insurance, insurance is multifaceted– reinsurance, segregated funds, pension laws – and the list goes on.  While I have ample guidance with work, the biggest challenge for me is the transition from private practice to in-house. The challenge presents itself in dealing with various internal clients, while balancing out business needs with legal advice. To surmount these issues, I use a two-pronged approach – first I aim to identify the needs of the client, what are they looking for, have a chat with them if need be and then commence the work and second, properly manage internal client expectations.

    Your experience includes dealing with diverse legal areas such as corporate law, employment law, and foreign investment law. Is there a specific project or deal that stands out as particularly memorable or challenging in your career?

    One transaction that stands out was a settlement agreement I was working on for a French banking giant. One of the conditions involved vacating a “mortgage” on a ship which was one of the securities. While a tangent work, I do not deal with maritime law – therefore it was particularly memorable and enjoyable given that the ship was not in port, the intricacies of UAE law and formalities required by the authorities, the nature and timing required to complete the transaction.

    As someone who has worked on a range of transactions, from joint ventures to business purchase agreements, what aspect of corporate law do you find most fascinating or intellectually stimulating?

    I find acquisitions to be fascinating. It is dynamic in nature involving strategic planning – including financial considerations, negotiations, structuring, due diligence and drafting/negotiating definitive agreements. Acquisitions have an implication and impact for the stakeholders, the companies, operations and the broader business and legal landscape – and this adds another layer of complexity in what is already a complex matter.

    In your role as a lawyer in Abu Dhabi/Dubai, you managed deal/transactional teams and conducted sessions to develop transaction strategies. How do you foster collaboration and effective communication within a legal team working on complex transactions?

    The framework of effective communication is built on organisation within the team, defining the roles at the inception, regular/daily check-ins depending on the complexity and urgency of the matter, encouraging open communication wherein team members to bring in diverse perspectives and fostering a culture of respect (which is key when working in an ethnically and linguistically diverse workspace).

    You pursued a Master of Laws (LLM) at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto. What motivated your decision to undertake this academic journey, and how has this experience enriched your legal perspective, especially considering the transition from Abu Dhabi/Dubai to Toronto?

    The motivation was very personal. I was moving from UAE to Canada and therefore needed to relicense myself. I could have taken the exams route which would have been economical and less time-consuming – but instead, I went in for the longer route of LLM. Getting back to academia was hard. However, I wanted to ingratiate myself with Canadian laws. I would recommend that to anyone moving to Canada to pursue law – just gives you a better understanding of the legal system and legal community. The LLM brought me up-to-date with what is going on in the Canadian legal space.

    As a member of the 2022-2023 LPPCA Executive, what goals or initiatives are you particularly excited about, and how do you see these contributing to the legal community in Toronto?

    This was a student body at the LPP. Nothing major here.

    You have been involved in various extracurricular activities, including being a Vice Chair for the School Council. How do you balance your professional commitments with your community involvement, and what motivates you to actively contribute to the community?

    I have always wanted to give back to the community. In Canada, there is a huge thrust towards volunteering. It starts right at school. Doing something for the community and building a sense of community are part of the school curriculum. I too have always wanted to give back to the community. Education and the future of kids is an interest of mine. So, I volunteer my time at the school council. I also volunteer my time with the LPP program at Toronto Metropolitan University (previously Ryerson University) to give back to the profession. I am also in the process of getting involved with United Way – an organisation that my office supports.

    Outside the legal realm, you’ve mentioned being a food and K-drama enthusiast. Can you share a favourite dish you enjoy preparing or a K-drama series that you found particularly captivating, and how do these hobbies contribute to your work-life balance?

    Love eating, cooking and entertaining friends. I do not have a favourite dish – but love trying out new cuisines. At present, I am obsessed with Hong Kong Chinese cuisine, particularly Youtiao. I have been trying to make it at home with little success.

    Having mentored and coached interns during your time in Abu Dhabi, how do you approach mentorship, and what advice would you give to aspiring legal professionals starting their careers?

    For me effective mentorship involves guiding mentees through a legal issue – irrespective of the complexity, sharing practical insights, and sharing feedback (including taking feedback too).  The most essential element for a good mentor-mentee relationship is mutual respect followed by open communication.

    Advice to new lawyers, as I recently stated in an alumni panel discussion for the current batch of LPP candidates,:

    Identify what you can do/are good at. Can you get clients – private practice then; cannot get clients – consider in-house, do you like the academia, do you want to go into law adjacent careers?

    Once you have done that, try your hands at many things. Have some experience in litigation – that is the foundation for a good solicitor practice.

    Pursue excellence and professionalism, and money will follow.

    Get in touch with Shruba Bhattacharya–

  • “Today our societal norms and values are seeing rapid changes and thanks to technological advances and social media, people are voicing their concerns more openly and are constantly connected”- Ashish Kumar, Partner, Jurisperitus Law Offices

    “Today our societal norms and values are seeing rapid changes and thanks to technological advances and social media, people are voicing their concerns more openly and are constantly connected”- Ashish Kumar, Partner, Jurisperitus Law Offices

    This Interview has been published by Pragya Chandni and and The SuperLawyer Team

    Your academic journey includes studying law both in India and the USA. How did these diverse educational experiences shape your perspective on the legal profession, and how do you think it contributed to your success in the field?

    While the principles of law are more or less the same everywhere, the manner in which the law is taught varies. It is however the overall experience that enriches you. In India, we studied law from the perspective of the statute and its applicability in different kinds of situations; in the USA we did case studies and advanced our reasoning of the applied law on such cases. What was different was the vast networking opportunities offered even at the institutional level in the USA when compared to India. Some of the friends I made then are now well established and recognized in the legal field and at senior positions in some of the top law firms and in-house. 

    With expertise spanning commercial litigation, arbitration, consumer protection, real estate, and more, how did you decide on such a diverse legal practice? Can you share a pivotal moment or experience that influenced your decision to specialize in these areas?

    My initial interest as a student of law was on the corporate side. I was during the time fascinated (like many students) of the work that corporate lawyers did, the transactions, the numbers etc. But as destiny would have it, after enrolling at the Bar and working for one year as a corporate lawyer, one day in court was all it took. Since that first day in court, I have not looked back while I may admit that I still do general corporate work as well. With respect to specialization, while there was no specific pivotal moment as such, I never wanted to be limited to only one particular area. I have enjoyed all that the learning that the profession has had to offer me. While some may argue a specialization has its own advantages, which I do not doubt, I know that there are many people who feel limited in their ability/outreach because of the specialization whereas I on the other hand am very comfortable appearing before various judicial and quasi judicial fora in different kinds of matters. I am as comfortable appearing before a Consumer Commission in a consumer matter as I would be before the National Green Tribunal in an environment related issue or before the High Court or Supreme Court for a commercial/contractual dispute. 

    As the head of the “Japan Desk” at your Firm, you handle the firm’s Japanese practice. Could you elaborate on the challenges and rewards of managing international legal matters, and how does it tie into your broader practice areas?

    Japan has been very close to my heart for a number of reasons. Not only is the country a close ally of India, the two nations have seen significant growth in bilateral relations through trade and commerce, culture and in the recent few years – cuisine. Anyone who has had the good fortune of being connected or has worked with Japan one way or the other would agree that the experience completely changes the person for the better. From the time I started more than 10 years ago to now, I can confidently say that it has been a rewarding experience. The Japanese build their relationships on trust and respect. If you can earn the respect of a Japanese person, you have earned yourself a lifelong friend. They are very thorough and extremely professional in their approach, which is what is also expected by them from their counsel. Unlike in India, where being late by 10 – 15 minutes for a business meeting and by almost an hour at parties is considered normal, Japanese value and respect your time. You will always see them arrive 10 minutes before the scheduled time so as to timely start the meetings. In case you require assistance, they will go out of their way to ensure that they can help you. Every trip to Japan or my interaction with a Japanese person has taught me something new. At the Firm we follow the policy of ‘Kaizen’ which means continuous improvement. We believe in the combined and collective talents of all our team members irrespective of position or rank, to propel growth of the Firm and to continuously improve ourselves in order to better cater to the needs of our clients. We advise and represent from time to time many Japanese companies including the sogo soshas in their business activities in India apart from hand holding companies that wish to come to India. Japan has a significant investment in the Indian market which is only going to grow with time and we are proud to be a part of this growth story.      

    You’ve had notable achievements, such as being one of the youngest Additional Advocate Generals and receiving recognitions like the 40 Under 40 Rising Star (2023) by Legal Era and 40 Under 40 (2022) recognized lawyer by BW Legal World. How do you balance leadership responsibilities with the demands of your legal practice, and how has this contributed to your professional growth?

    What I am today is the blessing of my seniors who mentored me and my peers who gave me their wholehearted support. Like you cannot clap with one hand, similarly every success story cannot involve only one individual. I have been very fortunate to have been honed by some of the best mentors and seniors in the profession. Growth is never constant and every turn brings with it a new meaning. I was taught to take responsibilities head on from a young age and with such responsibilities also came leadership positions. After a certain stage in life, professional growth does not remain limited only to how well you can execute or how much business you can develop. Professional growth is how you are perceived by your peers and seniors in the profession, by your clients and friends from various walks of life, how much you have contributed back to society and how well you trained your juniors. Ultimately all these and more factors will shape and determine the growth of an individual.

    As far as balancing leadership responsibilities with demands of the legal practice is concerned, it is all inter connected and you cannot fix timelines in a day for either one of them. As the great Mr. Fali Nariman, Ld. Sr. Advocate has said, for lawyers there is no start and end time. You cannot look at the watch and say it is time to go home.

    Given your involvement in diverse leadership roles and professional activities, including being a former Member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Shapers Community and young leader of the Science & Technology in Society Forum (STS Forum) of Japan, how do you see the intersection of law and broader societal issues? How has this influenced your approach to your legal practice?

    Law is one of the most noble professions, second only to that of medicine/doctor. To a great extent our legal system is based on our societal values and beliefs. Today our societal norms and values are seeing rapid changes and thanks to technological advances and social media, people are voicing their concerns more openly and are constantly connected. The Judiciary plays a very critical role in keeping a fine balance between past, present and future requirements of the evolving society. As officers of the court, it is our duty to the best of our ability, to represent and raise the voices of concern of our society, to be the voice of those who are unheard or have limited or no access to justice. The World Economic Forum as well as the STS Forum act as a strategic partner and platforms respectively for world leaders, policy makers, members of the business and professional community to come together, discuss and debate on a host of issues concerning our global society as a whole. The Global Shapers Community was promoted by Klaus Schwab to encourage and train the young leaders of tomorrow. We discussed, debated, raised concerns, held key discussions and representations with those in power, on a number of issues. The result was that we as individuals also got more sensitized to the ills of society and in one way or the other pledged to ourselves to try to make a difference. Similarly, the STS Forum is an excellent platform which discusses the environment, carbon footprint and the rapid growth of technology and AI all of which require regulations and safeguards. These discussions are important from a legal perspective as well as we are able to look at law concerning these areas not only from the point of view of what the law says but holistically for the larger good of society. 

    You’ve successfully represented the State of Rajasthan before the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Delhi. Can you share a challenging case you’ve worked on and the strategies you employed to secure a favorable outcome for your client?

    You need to do your best for the client. The outcome is the destiny of the client. There have been many challenging cases. But to briefly share, two in specific –  one of the first cases that I had handled and was led by Dr. Manish Singhvi, Ld. Sr. Advocate, pertained to the exercise of powers of the Government in creation / demarcation/ reorganization of the boundaries of gram panchayats and panchayat samities under the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. A constitutional question was involved as the Hon’ble High Court, contrary to the clear bar under Article 243(O), had interfered with the powers of the State Government to perform such exercise. As there was more than one notification, however all notifications connected with each other, the Hon’ble High Court in the impugned order while taking cognizance of the bar under Article 243(O) for one notification, held the other notifications to be void, therefore making the impugned judgment mutually contradictory. We had successfully argued in the Supreme Court that the constitutional bar would equally apply to all notifications and since the elections were around the corner had also obtained a stay on the order of the Hon’ble High Court. This was a matter of critical importance given the significance as well as the timelines. I remember the entire team had worked day and night to get the SLP ready and filed before the winter vacations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

    Another interesting matter inter alia involved the argument on the applicability of the doctrine of “proof beyond reasonable doubt” / rules of evidence which govern a criminal trial, in a disciplinary/departmental enquiry. On behalf of the State, I had argued that unlike in a criminal trial, a disciplinary enquiry was not mandated to be governed by the rigor of the said doctrine and that only “preponderance of probabilities” was sufficient to establish guilt in a departmental enquiry. It was argued by the Respondent that since he was acquitted in a criminal trial therefore he should be reinstated in the services. On behalf of the State, while arguing on the applicability of the doctrine above mentioned to departmental enquiries a distinction was also made on the basis of an acquittal which was “honorable” and one which was on the basis of “benefit of doubt”. On the basis of law and arguments on facts, a favourable order was obtained for the State. 

    The strategy adopted for every matter is simple. Know your facts well. Read every document line to line, word to word and understand the implication. Once the facts have been mastered, read and analyze the law and then the judgments both in favour as well as against. Once all three things have been done, you will be in a better position to frame your arguments. I have always made hand written notes for my arguments by bifurcating various arguments and supporting each argument with relevant facts and case law. As an officer of the court it is also your duty to inform the court of any law (judgment) which may be against you and also to do our best to try to distinguish the facts of that matter from yours. Additionally, I always look at the Supreme Court first for judicial precedents. Being the top most court, the decisions are binding on all courts below. Further, in case you are relying on a judgment/order of a High Court or a Tribunal/Commission for matters before such forums, it is imperative to do a check on whether the order/judgment relied upon has been challenged/appealed or stayed or upheld. You do not want to be caught in a situation where you are relying on some law which is no longer applicable. But the first principle is to know your facts. If you are not fully aware of your facts you cannot apply the law. Last but not the least, you have to wear the hat of your client and think why certain contracts/clauses (in case of a commercial matter) were drafted. What was the intention? Once you understand this, you will be able to better understand and appreciate a document in the context of the issue at hand. 

    In addition to your legal pursuits, you are passionate about technology, automobiles, AI, and space science. How do these interests intersect with your legal career, and do they influence your approach to handling cases or advising clients in specific industries?

    Not everything of interest or passion needs to intersect with the career. Having said that, AI is fast gaining importance in the legal field and we all need to be updated with the rapid changes in the field of technology as well as adopt them. AI is a great facilitator with respect to time management, case management and research. However, in the argument of AI vs the human brain, the latter will always prevail. Through technology, it has become easier to get more information to keep one better informed and better prepared. Since time is precious, we have consciously been using various interfaces for virtual conferences to avoid the need to travel either for the client or for the Firm’s counsels, unless absolutely necessary. The Chief Justice of India is a great source of inspiration and encouragement when it comes to technology. Thanks to his persistent efforts to make our judicial system technologically sound, we are able to represent more clients in multiple forums in a timely manner, clients sitting in far away places can participate in the proceedings and see first hand how their matter is progressing instead of solely relying on the word of the counsel, the pressure on physical infrastructure will also with time ease as more and more judicial and quasi judicial fora get technologically sound. With respect to advising clients in specific industries, since I like to understand about technology, I make a special effort to study and understand how my client’s business, machines, industry etc. works. If you are a commercial practice lawyer, it is very important for you to first understand your client’s business and its functioning. Once this is understood you will find yourself in a better position to represent the facts before a court. My other passions, such as automobiles or space science have nothing to do with the profession. I love cars from classic to modern. But I feel that automobile designers in their pursuit for making something different are losing the touch of designing beautiful cars that are pleasing to the eyes as they once were. The study of space and life beyond what we know, the thought that there are other life forms somewhere far away more advanced in every sense than us, has always fascinated me.   

    Finally, drawing from your diverse experiences and achievements, what advice would you give to law graduates entering the field today, especially those interested in pursuing a path similar to yours?

    No path is easy or difficult. You need to have patience and give yourself time to grow. Today I see a trend where law graduates tend to quickly shift from one place to another within a span of 6 months to a year if not less. There is an assumption that one has learned everything one could in this time span. This is not correct. Knowing a particular section or 10 cases for reference is not knowing the law. To evolve as a lawyer you need to be consistent and stable. The sections will always remain, what will change is how you interpret and apply them to different fact situations. That is when you will derive a new meaning. Litigation is an exciting field. Everyday is a new day to learn, to absorb, to experience. My advice to the law graduates looking to enter into this practice would therefore be that they do not restrict themselves to only one court. They should gain experience in all courts. If someday you do not have a matter assigned, take out time and just sit in a courtroom and absorb the proceedings. Understand how the Courts are seeking clarity/asking questions, how the counsels are arguing, how the law is being applied. Specially sit in your respective High Court’s and if possible the Supreme Court and hear the arguments of some celebrated Senior Counsel’s. There is a great deal of learning. The more hands-on experience you will have the better you will learn. In addition to this, never stop reading. We have very good reference books on all areas of practice and subjects which explain concepts clearly. Take out at least one hour every day to spend on reading reference books as well as new cases to enhance your knowledge. Further and most importantly, practice your oratory and legal writing. No amount of knowledge will be beneficial if you cannot fluently put it on paper or argue in court. Last but not the least, take criticism or review in a positive way. The fact that your mentor/senior/colleague has taken out time to point out mistakes is a blessing in disguise meant for you to reflect on and improve.

    Get in touch with Ashish Kumar-

  • “The more diverse your practice areas are the better it is for you and your growth” – A Global Trailblazer in Wealth Management Solutions, Varun Kalsi, Global Head of Legal & Business Solutions, Lighthouse Canton

    “The more diverse your practice areas are the better it is for you and your growth” – A Global Trailblazer in Wealth Management Solutions, Varun Kalsi, Global Head of Legal & Business Solutions, Lighthouse Canton

    This interview has been published by Namrata Singh and The SuperLawyer Team

    Varun, it’s a pleasure to have you for this interview. Could you please introduce yourself and share a bit about your journey and your current role as the Global Head of Legal and Business Solutions at Lighthouse Canton? 

    Thank you for inviting me for this interview. I began my legal career back in 2007-08. Predominantly, I have always been a law firm lawyer before joining Lighthouse Canton as their Global Head of Legal and Business Solutions. I would bifurcate my career into two parts wherein the first part was spent at Dua Associates where I began as an Associate and continued for almost a decade. Thereafter, I was a Partner at PSA Legal Counsellors, and Desai & Diwanji, respectively. At Lighthouse Canton, I oversee the legal function, which is self-explanatory. The other function that I oversee is business solutions, which is essentially at the heart of the wealth management business of Lighthouse Canton, which has 2 main businesses wealth and asset management. While legal has a broad range and would cover arrangements on asset management, HR and myriad other areas across the organisation, business solutions cater to HNIs and UHNIs who are on the lookout for niche tax/other structuring solutions, setting up an offshore family office, flipping their current structure, succession planning solutions and so on.

    Varun, you pursued your Master of Laws (LLM) at NYU in New York and now hold a prominent position in Singapore. How did your education in the U.S. influence your career path, and what prompted your move to Singapore? 

    Education in the US is an incredibly enlightening experience. Not only is the method of instruction different from that in India or England, but the culture and approach towards education per se are distinct. The focus is on discussion, rationale, understanding and analysis, and your age or current vocation does not matter. There is no limitation to acquiring or enhancing one’s skill set. Ideally, I would have liked to work in the US for some time at least. But as they say, man proposes and God disposes. Shortly after I began my LLM program the world was hit by something called the subprime mortgage crisis, a global recessionary situation wherein the US was the epicentre of this economic earthquake, and I was one of those right in the middle of it. That apart, the US, especially New York, teaches you a lot about life in general. One of those things is self-reliance or sufficiency. If you are open to the idea, you could discover yourself in such a situation. Let’s face it. The LLM program at a premium varsity abroad is expensive for the average person. So, one would like to procure a work opportunity in the US to obtain exposure and recover the hefty tuition unless one manages a scholarship. The latter was on my agenda, but that discussion is for another day, I guess. Law firms in the US are extremely professional. Thus, even rejections to my request for placement were kindly worded and came to me in sealed envelopes. Other than the fact that you are away from home/family, an existing economic crisis only has a compounding effect on one’s self-esteem. However, sometimes, such a situation only makes one stronger, and it’s not in my DNA to give up easily. Thus, I took everything with a pinch of salt and made my way back to India. To clarify, Singapore was not on my agenda then. 

    Can you share insights into adapting to the legal and business environment in Asia after your experiences in the U.S.? 

    Honestly, the first time I thought about Singapore as a place where I could work and live was when I was transiting from Singapore for a holiday in 2015. The layover was longer than usual for some reason, so we opted for the free city tour that Singapore Airlines does from the Changi airport. It is an interesting tour for someone who has never been to Singapore. I had already been here twice and thought that I was aware of the city, but things were to change. The island country had changed a lot from the days when Orchard Road was the city centre and the Merlion stood tall at Sentosa. Now, there was a thriving central business district at Raffles Place/Collyer Quay and the city had transformed itself in more ways than one. So, yes, the thought did cross my mind, but I was too preoccupied with what I was already doing so I did not follow through. It was only in 2021-22, when the opportunity with Lighthouse Canton came along that I put my mind to it and began a detailed investigation into the possibility of moving to Singapore. Singapore and the US are very different from each other. One of the major factors is the sheer size, demographics, and population of the respective countries. There is no second-guessing about Singapore’s position as the financial hub of Southeast Asia. Further, the law and order promulgation, enforcement, political stability, and swift and efficient judiciary make it a force to reckon with not only in Asia but also in the world. As Singapore is a common law country, the basic structure of all laws is like other common law countries with subtle nuances to the same. The banking and finance industry is at the centre stage and almost all global corporations and conglomerates have a significant presence here. Honestly, the pressure to deliver never changes if you take your work seriously and have the desire to grow personally and professionally. So, while there could be a difference in approach, there is no compromise on quality. 

    You’ve had a diverse and extensive career, ranging from private practice at law firms to your current global leadership role. How has your journey, including experiences at Desai & Diwanji, Priti Suri & Associates, and Dua Associates, shaped your approach to legal and business solutions? 

    It has been a rather interesting journey wherein I have worked with two large firms and one boutique law firm. I began my career at Dua Associates, so a large part of my initial learnings came from here. I was fortunate to report to a senior partner with rich experience behind him. While that meant that expectations were always high, I had the opportunity to learn, sometimes by simply observing my senior and some other times by asking the right questions of him. One needs to understand that this process necessarily involves unbiased introspection as otherwise, you will not be able to upskill, improve yourself and identify the chinks in your armour. Further, another important thing is to know what to learn and imbibe and what not to. Of course, that comes with experience, age, and wisdom. By the time I was at PSA, I was relatively senior and joined them as a partner. Also, as it is a boutique law firm, the manner of operations was very different from that at Dua Associates. However, as we were a lean team, everyone put that extra effort to make things happen and sometimes the energy you create in such situations is contagious to others too. It was here that I unlearned some of the things that I had learnt as I identified and learnt some things that were better and contemporary than what I was accustomed to previously. One needs to appreciate that learning is a continuous process and one must continue to upskill themselves and sync with the present. While I had already begun the process of developing my own book, it was at PSA, that I shifted gears and opened my mind to different possibilities at work. Working at both these wonderful organizations gave me an insight into setups that were traditional and a heady mix of modern and traditional. My last law firm stint before Lighthouse Canton was at D&D, wherein I worked closely with the other partners. So, yes, I was back to a large law firm setup but the manner of functioning of the organization was again distinct from what I had seen in my earlier firms. As I said, the learning never stops. One needs to be a good observer and listener to identify what should be done and also what should not be done in a particular situation. Working at these firms was an enriching experience that shaped my career for the better and made me a better lawyer and a person.     

    As the Global Head of Legal & Business Solutions, you provide legal support to wealth and asset management businesses. How do you strike a balance between addressing legal intricacies and facilitating business solutions, especially in the wealth management sector? 

    Interestingly, there is an overlap between the legal and business solutions functions. As mentioned earlier, business solutions involve providing structuring solutions to HNIs/UHNIs, that are tax efficient. Further, a client may have successional planning requirements, which is akin to private client practice at law firms. At Lighthouse Canton, the main difference is that client requirements will typically mostly be at a global level, unlike a law firm wherein you may still engage in domestic mandates and transactions. Also, at law firms, we would typically engage a local counsel when catering to the laws of a foreign jurisdiction. However, with business solutions, there is an expectation to have a preliminary handle on foreign laws too. For instance, one will have to examine legal regimes across jurisdictions to appreciate the tax impact for a particular client. It is pertinent to note that this will change depending on the situation, objectives, and asset locations of a client. Similarly, succession planning solutions will also require us to assess the best option available globally, to address a client’s needs and objectives. Of course, we will engage with local advisers as and when necessary. Thus, it is fair to say that my legal background is critical in enabling me to deliver requisite solutions to our wealth management clientele.

    Your role involves executing wealth management pitches for UHNI prospects, including conglomerates and founders. Can you share an interesting experience or a successful pitch that stands out in your memory? 

    There have been many such experiences that are worth remembering or mentioning. But one needs to understand that a pitch to provide a solution becomes even more interesting where there is interplay between multiple jurisdictions, or where there is some uncertainty in applicable laws. A classical situation that arose some time ago was when we were prospecting a conglomerate for setting up its family office in Singapore. For this purpose, the prospect would make overseas direct investment/ODI from India under the new route for operating companies in India, as introduced by the legislature in August 2022. Interestingly, while on paper, which is also backed by a law firm’s opinion, this route is still available, practically it is not possible due to certain informal communication to authorised dealer banks, who are no longer willing to allow remittance through this new route. Again, this is one amongst several instances that have been extremely intriguing and interesting.

    Among the diverse legal projects, you’ve been involved in, is there one that stands out as your favourite? What made it particularly memorable or rewarding? 

    This is a tough one. I have been party to many and it is hard to place a finger on anyone. However, let me share one of them for our audience. The thing in legal practice is that favourites will change with time. This is so because at a later point in time, hopefully, one will be more experienced/skilled and the same thing that was interesting once may appear mundane now. In a particular instance, I met someone for a business development meeting at their office. We spoke for an hour about various businesses and issues that the group was involved with and areas where I could help the organization. The meeting was with the CEO himself. About a week after our meeting, he sent me a text saying I liked what you told me about securing our group’s IP. Let’s begin with that and see where we go. From there, I ended up assisting the promoter on their private client matters and other issues that the group was facing from time to time. Even today, I am in touch with the gentleman and my highest reward is not the billing that happened but the faith he reposed in me in executing different kinds of tasks for the group. I am ecstatic that I earned a person while earning my livelihood.

    Outside of the legal realm, what are your personal interests or hobbies that bring you joy and relaxation? How do you unwind from the complexities of legal leadership? 

    Now we are talking. I love my music, food, outdoor sports, and spending time with family including my extended family and specifically, my grandparents. I firmly believe that one should not forget that later our grandparents and parents will need us just the way we needed them earlier (and still do). As an aside, I am agnostic to the genre/kind of music or food as the music should sound nice and the food should taste good.

    In your career, you’ve worked across various legal domains, from general corporate to private client and intellectual property laws. How has this diversity contributed to your skills, and what advice do you have for legal professionals looking to diversify their practice? 

    Interestingly, nowadays most law firms have lawyers who operate in silos in terms of practice areas. While that can be a good thing for some practice areas, for some others, it is my view, that it inhibits growth. So, if you have the choice to diversify your practice areas, please do. However, keeping in mind how most law firms will have specific practice area-based departments, it makes sense to bifurcate your skill sets between your core areas and those that move around them. This is crucial from most large law firm’s perspective. Interestingly, in a smaller law firm (and some larger ones too), or in-house role, the more diverse your practice areas are the better it is for you and your growth. While it makes sense to augment your skill set, you must choose your areas wisely both in terms of your core areas and the then prevailing trends and opportunities.

    As we conclude, we’d love to hear your perspective on the importance of continuous learning in the legal profession. How do you stay updated on industry developments, and what role does ongoing education play in your career? 

    As I have already acknowledged, learning is indeed a continuous process. Personally, I keep my eyes and ears open concerning anything that affects my current work profile, or that may otherwise have any relation to the same. As you would appreciate, with the global role, my canvas is quite large. So, I need to keep painting when the opportunity arises while the canvas keeps on expanding itself. We also indulge in external trainings, that can enable us to improve our work and knowledge especially those in relation to Lighthouse Canton’s wealth management business. Thus, ongoing learning and education are critical for my functions.

    Get in touch with Varun Kalsi-

  • Take feedback seriously, but never to heart. Also it only reflects how you were at that particular point in time and never a reflection on your future opportunities or ability- Samarth Chaddha, Legal Counsel at Goeasy

    Take feedback seriously, but never to heart. Also it only reflects how you were at that particular point in time and never a reflection on your future opportunities or ability- Samarth Chaddha, Legal Counsel at Goeasy

    This interview has been published by  Priyanka Karwa and The SuperLawyer Team

    Sir, please tell us about your journey and how you ended up pursuing a career in law? What inspired you to choose this path?

    I was working after I completed my graduation in Economics and I felt the need to study further. At that point, an MBA seemed like it would require many more years of work experience, so I decided to look into becoming a lawyer. The idea of law school aligned with my idea of writing, researching and discussing laws and policies – all of which were activities I enjoyed. 

    With your combined academic and working experience in legal counseling within various business environments, what have been the most valuable lessons you’ve learned along the way?

    I think I have learned what kind of mentor to be and what not to be. I have had bad bosses, and some very good ones. Therefore, I know what not to do. On the technical front, I have learned how to redline and draft agreements which is a skill we have to keep getting better at as we progress in our career. 

    In your previous roles, you have been involved in regulatory compliance, risk anticipation and management, as well as contract review. Could you share some examples of challenges you faced in these areas and how you successfully navigated them?

    Initially I found some of these agreements daunting and confusing to say the least. But with the right levels of practice, and some help from other colleagues and mentors, the process of reading an Agreement became more easier for me. I recommend having a checklist or some flow of standard steps so you don’t end up missing out on the fine print! 

    You have been responsible for overseeing vendor management for new contracts, contractual work, litigation, and licensing. Could you discuss a project or initiative where you implemented a vendor management process that had a significant impact on the organization?

    In my previous role, I built out a vendor management policy that was adopted by the organization. This was an opportunity for me to understand the pain points of different stakeholders and work with them in creating a policy that reflected their concerns. Eventually this was created into an updated version as well and impacted the business in a big way. 

    Throughout your career, you have demonstrated strong analytical and critical thinking skills. Can you share an example of a complex legal problem you encountered and how you approached its resolution?

    I remember negotiating in a conference room over a force majeure clause and whether the pandemic was still foreseeable or unforeseen. I just tried to understand the other party’s perspective and my approach was to come to a gradual resolution with a more give and take mentality as we went along with the contract negotiation. 

    Communication is a vital skill for any legal professional. How have you utilized your oral and written communication skills to effectively collaborate with colleagues, clients, and stakeholders?

    This is something we have to keep working on. Whether it is emails, or even speaking to clients and stakeholders on the phone – we are always communicating. I try to keep my emails short and my tone to be friendly or business casual for the most part. I typically find that if you are not able to deliver, sending a holding email can be an effective way to buy some time and not disappoint. 

    Lastly, based on your extensive experience, what advice would you give to fresh graduates who are just starting their careers in the legal field? What key skills or mindset should they focus on developing to succeed in this profession?

    Be ruthless. Take feedback seriously, but never to heart. Also it only reflects how you were at that particular point in time and never a reflection on your future opportunities or ability. Everything can be taught and learned – no body is born with the ability to decode legislation or draft agreements. Similar to driving, we all are learners and keep practicing our craft to be so in the “practice” of law. 

    Get in touch with Samarth Chaddha-

  • Struggle is a constant phenomenon and there is no escaping it- Shreya Sircar, Partner at Luthra and Luthra Law Offices

    Struggle is a constant phenomenon and there is no escaping it- Shreya Sircar, Partner at Luthra and Luthra Law Offices

    This interview has been published by  Priyanka Karwa and The SuperLawyer Team

    To give this conversation a start, can you tell us about your background and how you became a multi-disciplinary dispute resolution practitioner and an experienced litigator?

    After my bachelor’s degree from Lady Shri Ram College, I pursued Law from Faculty of Law University of Delhi and master’s from New York University School of Law. I started my career with the Chamber of Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate, and had the good fortune of working with the office of Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Amarchand Mangaldas Suresh A. Shroff & Co., SAM Co., and Bharucha & Partners. Presently, I am a dispute resolution practitioner and Partner at Luthra & Luthra Law Offices.

    About a decade & more ago, dispute resolution practice was more of a generalist stream where clients approached civil lawyers for any commercial dispute that needed resolution. As a corollary, being multi-disciplinary was the norm and less of a calculated choice. Specialized practice areas/verticals and boutique firms are a relatively recent phenomenon.

    As for your question of being an ‘experienced litigator’, a lawyer practicing dispute resolution, ought to be a litigator who can ably put forth the client’s case before Court and safeguard client’s best interests.

    What are some of the industries you have worked with, and how have you helped them navigate through regulatory and compliance matters?

    My industry experience includes infrastructure, construction, manufacturing, oil & natural gas, the rolling stock industry, engineering equipment, and hydropower projects, amongst others. I, along with my team assist clients to steer a mandate from start to finish. This involves advising and representing clients on all ancillary aspects including advisory, regulatory approvals, and on-going compliance matters. We adopt an integrated approach, working with multiple practice experts to identify the optimal strategy and structure for a client.

    You specialize in shareholder disputes and contractual claims. Could you please tell us more about the challenges of working on these types of cases, and how you overcome them?

    One of the challenges in handling shareholders or contractual disputes is to mitigate the risk of negative impact on performance, operation, and the business of the company. Occasionally, these disputes can also cause reputational loss, consequently, impacting its profitability and growth.

    I routinely advise clients to ensure that agreements are well drafted to narrow the scope for future disputes. Expressly written, unambiguous contractual clauses are essential to ensure that shareholder and contractual disputes are timely managed and effectively resolved, with minimal adverse effect on the business. The aim is to device strategies to prevent potential disputes while balancing shareholder interests.

    Another aspect to consider especially in shareholder disputes is to set out the mechanism for treatment of individual shares in case of a deadlock. This enables shareholders to offer to buy shares of another shareholder at a determined rate or sell shares to the other shareholders, thereby ensuring that conflicting shareholders exit the company without causing undue harm either to the shareholders’ or the company’s interest. 

    You have represented clients in various courts and tribunals, including quasi-judicial authorities and commissions. Can you share with us a particularly challenging case you worked on, and how you managed to achieve a favorable outcome?

    One of my most challenging cases has been the one that was easiest on facts and merits. While there were excellent supporting documents and what seemed like a straightforward case in our favour, took years and several rounds of litigation to conclude. This was primarily because we were opposing a party in person. Such cases become challenging as they are largely driven by emotions and less by logic, facts, and law. Be that as it may, ultimately court orders and outcomes of cases are premised on evidence and correct application of the extant law and that held us in good stead.

    What are some of the emerging trends in dispute resolution and arbitration that you think will shape the industry in the coming years?

    Use of technology and increased digitisation have permeated most aspects of life and dispute resolution is no exception to it. There are some developing trends even in dispute resolution, with one such trend being, electronic discovery of documents and records. With many businesses being conducted digitally, the process of collecting and reviewing digital data in litigation and arbitration has increased manifold. Our courts are also increasingly relying on technology such as video conferencing, e-filing systems, live streaming of cases etc., to improve efficiency and ensure greater accessibility to the legal system.

    More particularly, in consumer transactions and services, we have witnessed an increase in class actions. Groups of people with similar claims are increasingly joining hands to consolidate their bargaining power to initiate legal action against bigwigs.

    I have also noticed a shift in the volume of work that was previously outsourced to law firms, as opposed to how much is now being accomplished in-house. While there may have been a reduction in the quantum of work being outsourced, dispute resolution practitioners are now also being approached for their expertise in evolving strategies for pre-litigation risk mitigation & related advisory.

    Can you tell us about an experience that had an impact on your career as a lawyer?

    Every case has taught me something new, but this question particularly reminds of an incident in my initial days as a litigator. I was assisting my senior on a matter and during the hearing, I found myself miserably underprepared. After the hearing, I received a well-deserved dressing down from my senior. That episode was my first and last, at being unprepared for a matter. I have since then, been extra cautious at being prepared for a day in Court. I learnt that as a litigator, preparation is the key. While one may develop court craft and gain confidence over the years, one needs to know one’s files thoroughly, from day one.

    Could you please tell us about your future plans, and how do you see your practice evolving in the future?

    The plan is to keep working now, and in the future; try to tap into opportunities of good civil commercial work and strive to get better at it. That is career progression as I see it.

    Lastly, what would you like to say to all the legal professionals out there who are struggling in their initial years?

    Struggle is a constant phenomenon and there is no escaping it. Only the nature and magnitude of struggle change with each career milestone. That said, my two pence worth of advice to young professionals is to keep working hard with utmost integrity, and in these times of instant gratification, give oneself time to progress, because progress takes time. There is no instant switch to success, which term itself, is relative.

    Get in touch with Shreya Sircar-