In this blog post, Varun Sen, a student pursuing a Diploma in Entrepreneurship Administration and Business Laws by NUJS, describes and critiques the advertising policies of law firms in India. 

The standards of legal ethics that guide the legal profession in India can be considered as outdated when compared to those expected of foreign law firms. Among other rules, the Bar Council of India Rules specifically imposes certain restrictions on the Indian legal profession that are not fitting with the liberalised economic order found elsewhere.

One such example is R. 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules,[1] which specifically prevents law firms and lawyers from advertising their practice on the market. However, there does exist a proviso that allows them to maintain websites about themselves in order to disseminate information and make valid choices.
The rooting of this restriction lies in the idea that commercial competition ought not to enter the realm of a professional service. Since the law is not a trade, and lawyers have to be held accountable to their clients for deficiencies in services, they ought not to be allowed to advertise as if they are dealing in a mercantile business.

The proviso to R. 36 acts as a possible path for corporate law firms in India to showcase their offerings. Considering that corporate law is relatively new, and must compete at a global level both as subject matter experts and as a corporate entity, it is required for them to be able to have websites. These may only allow them to provide contact information, areas of specialisation and qualifications. However, many Indian law firms, including Trilegal[2] and Khaitan[3] do maintain websites that ensure visitors sign clickwrap agreements before they enter the websites themselves. These agreements act as an undertaking for visitors to know that they are agreeing to the fact that the websites are not acting as advertising spaces, but are merely providing information.

Need For New Advertising Policies

This author argues that this is outdated as a policy for the following reasons:

• Given that the websites do provide for click-wrap agreements that absolve them of any liability in cases where visitors do act upon any information provided on the website, in effect the Bar Council Rules are not be respected with the original intent.
• The moral reasoning of viewing the legal profession as noble is also no longer respected for medicine, which was once on the same footing but has now been corporatized. This makes the restrictions on law firms unjustified.
• It is entirely unnecessary to expect lawyers not to be able to advertise within a limited space, since a global market for law firms requires them to be able to do so, in order to simply show that the legal ecosystem in India is no different from the ecosystem seen abroad. This helps assure clients, and not appear less amateur than competitors on a global level. Brand identity development is required for corporate entities to gain visibility.
• Considering that the entry of foreign law firms into India is being anticipated, (irrespective of the merits of that idea), it is unlikely that this is going to be maintained as a policy for much longer since liberalising entry into a profession brings in harmonisation requirements with international standards.[4] Law firms are being forced to operate offices overseas and host their websites from there. This is simply cost-inefficient. Indian law firms will have to be put on parity with foreign law firms, else be disadvantaged by their entry.
• Finally, R. 36 indicates that any sort of promotion is a violation. However, law firms are taking on pro bono work, holding conferences and lectures, utilising PR firms, etc. which means that the limited amount of flexibility given by the BCI is being sidestepped by them having to utilise avenues which blur lines far more than a website or an advertisement would. This is especially true considering that free legal aid or moot court competitions fall on the most permissible side of the spectrum, creating a vast space of grey unregulated avenues in the middle such as training camps, partnerships with NGOs, etc.
• If paid news can exist in newspapers with disclaimers, then so can advertisements for law firms. While there is a legitimate fear of ambulance chasing as seen in the US, this can also help upcoming law firms in niche fields in India, such as the Enviro Legal Defence Firm attract clients in rural areas. Law firms require avenues to move out of purely metropolitan spaces, and the problems of misleading advertisements are not unique to them. Have proper ethical guidelines, instead of banning them, serves the purpose better. [5]
• One possible avenue is informing, which is a small step from the status quo, which means laying down standards for lawyers to publish articles on their brochures or websites, in order to boost their profiles. Another option is to adopt the Barmark, a kitemark that sets standards of best practices, by the Bar Council of England and Wales that allows for industry standards to be followed. The legal system is not just about lawyers, but about the clients they represent as well, and advertising or promotion can allow them to be seen as approachable and accountable.[6]

Thus, the advertising policies for law firms in India are restrained by various archaic Rules; that ought to liberalise for the benefit of the ecosystem as a whole.

References: 

[1] Read with the Advocates Act.

[2] http://www.trilegal.com/

[3] http://www.khaitanco.com/SitePages/Index.aspx

[4] http://www.livemint.com/Companies/aJhpg7HBhcPzgV38Xk5o7K/Entry-of-foreign-law-firms-far-from-a-done-deal.html

[5] http://www.livemint.com/Companies/vqsXsEeGYuqPli9I8TPL0O/Law-firms-find-loopholes-to-promote-their-services.html

[6] http://indialawjournal.com/volume1/issue_1/legal_articles_sarin.html