header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 April 2012 / Audley Sheppard , Joachim Delaney
Issue: 7509 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Fly in & fly out

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Audley Sheppard & Joachim Delaney welcome Indian moves to be recognised as an international arbitration hub
The Madras High Court has ruled that there is no bar on foreign lawyers visiting India on a fly-in-fly-out basis to provide legal advice to their clients in India on foreign law. In addition, foreign lawyers representing parties in international commercial arbitrations are permitted to participate in such proceedings in India. 

The ruling was given in a public interest case, AK Balaji v The Government of India, Ashurst LLP et al (21 February 2012). The case was brought by a lawyer on behalf of the Association of Indian Lawyers (a Tamil Nadu based pressure group) in Tamil Nadu against 31 foreign law firms and one legal process outsourcing company (LPO). 
 
The claimant argued that the foreign law firms and LPO were practising law in India in contravention of Indian laws, particularly the Advocates Act 1961. Some foreign law firms had opened offices in India, while other firms, it was argued, conducted their
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll