LEGAL SOLUTIONS AT ‘EASE’
The legal industry has seen a sea of change with Legal Process Outsourcing emerging as a necessity for legal departments and law firms to cut costs and stay competitive. After the laudatory BPO success, India, with its huge pool of English speaking and common law system trained lawyers, is treading fast toward becoming the global leader in the LPO sector, and by 2015, the LPO sector is expected to be worth $3 billion with India stealing 60% of the market.
Legal services continue to be less affordable with law firms increasing their billable rates every year in the Western nations. Especially in the US, global corporations are realizing that in order to survive heavy competition, the need of the hour is to keep their legal costs tight, while continuing to combat the increasing amount of litigation they face. In order to face this challenge, Legal profession as such is undergoing a transition, depending heavily on LPOs for support. At this juncture, LegalEase has gained timely market recognition as the leading LPO provider.
LegalEase Solutions is a Michigan based legal outsourcing company with significant experience and expertise in the legal and business fields. The company began its operation in India with 5 employees at Cochin in November, 2005. At present, LegalEase has three offices world-wide, in Michigan, Chennai and Cochin, and has clients in 38 States in US, in Canada and the U.K. The company’s clientele includes experienced solo practitioners, reputed law firms, major automobile manufacturing companies, insurance companies, Fortune 500 and Global 2000 legal departments, large legal auditing and analysis firms etc.
To quote Tariq Hafeez, the Founder cum President of and General Counsel for LegalEase Solutions LLC, “our mission is to help lawyers and departments become more competitive, efficient and cost effective by providing high quality, accurate and affordable legal products and services. Further, the company aims at making a difference in the global communities it operates by providing opportunity and leveraging our expertise in the legal field to make a social impact.”
LegalEase offers various legal technology products and support via its strategic partnerships which include:
· Legal research and writing
· Transactional work
· Document review
· Litigation support
According to Tariq Akbar, CEO of LegalEase, “there are enough reasons why the clients can expect top notch quality from the company. LegalEase uses a blended model to provide its services. Experienced US attorneys control all projects through their lifecycles while Indian offices provide them with all support they might need. Attorneys in India are given intensive training on US law and use of online tools such as Lexis Nexis before any work is allotted to them. Once the work is done by the Indian attorneys, the finished product is reviewed by the US attorneys. All products citing case law will be accompanied by a list of shepardized cases so that one can always be certain that the cases are good law. Further, all information from clients is collected using standardized templates and exchanged via secure encrypted mail, avoiding any concern over security issues.”
A recent research memo prepared by LegalEase on the recognition of UK bankruptcy judgment in Canada speaks volumes on how big a role LPOs like LegalEase can play in the global legal scenario. The Legal Memorandum prepared by LegalEase facilitated a speedy out-of-court settlement between a divorced UK citizen, declared as bankrupt by the UK bankruptcy court, and a Canadian lady, in a suit filed by the lady before the Canadian court. The Canadian law firm representing the husband contacted LegalEase US, which in turn, sent the matter to its office in India. Though the case presented uneasy factual conundrum where the subject matter was intertwined by the laws of two independent sovereign nations, LegalEase managed to prepare the research memo in a quick turnaround time of 4 working days. The research finding by LegalEase practically sealed the opposite party’s case since statutes and precedents provided ample authority for recognition of UK bankruptcy judgment in Canada. Interestingly, reading the memo prepared by LegalEase Solutions, the opposite party opted for an out-of-court settlement. In an industry where time is money, it is amazing that a Legal Outsourcing Company could provide premium legal support solutions like this to busy lawyers in record time. Obviously, LPO’s like LegalEase can afford the top notch technology and make use of talents worldwide.
LegalEase’s progress has been the result of a concerted effort of the company’s employees, management, Board of Advisors, and especially clients, for their continuing faith in the quality of the legal support provided by the company. According to Seema Sarathkumar, Associate, LegalEase, Cochin, “At LegalEase, training is not just provided at the beginning, but is an ever-going process.” “At LegalEase, we work together as a family, upholding our motto, “Think Forward; Think One” which helps us stay focused on what we do, and interestingly, the company probably has the lowest rate of employee attrition among Indian LPOs” says Pooja Mohan, Manager of Operations, LegalEase, Cochin.
In this era, where legal profession is set for a major change, LPOs like LegalEase have a promising future. The clients started realizing that they can get better legal service from LPOs at a much lower cost than that of traditional law firms. LPO is emerging as an attractive proposition not only for outside corporations, but also for domestic entrepreneurs. Commoditization and standardization of legal services being the modern ‘mantra’, LPOs can play a much bigger role in the coming years.
The time is not far when LPOs like LegalEase, with its judicious blending of legal cost with time, productivity and quality, come to the forefront of the mind of clients when they seek quality legal service. The client testimonials underscore the progress that LegalEase has made so far in the industry. Clients have begun to perceive LPOs as future legal support providers, and indeed, we look forward to the future and move ahead, with elan.
MANOJ.P.M.
(The author holds Masters Degree in Commercial Law and is presently working as Junior Associate at Legalease Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Cochin.)
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Friday, May 23, 2008
Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO): 2007 And Beyond
Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO): 2007 And Beyond
Rajashree on -->20 Feb 2008
Over the course of the last couple of years leading law firms have begun to wake up to the reality that we live and operate in a global marketplace. Technology enables an increasing array of legal support services and higher value legal work to be outsourced offshore. The legal profession is now starting to take advantage of the labor arbitrage that has been exploited by other industries for well over a decade. Throughout 2006 and 2007 the offshore legal outsourcing market also witnessed the entry of some of the world’s largest Business Process Outsourcing (BPOs) companies together with a significant level of venture capital and private equity funding.
This article will examine the driving forces behind the emergence of the LPO industry and how it has developed over the last few years. I will also be offering some insight into the direction the industry will take in 2008 and beyond. Finally, I intend to take a more detailed look at the impact that the recently passed UK Legal Services Bill will have on the offshore legal outsourcing market. I am both delighted and fortunate to have contributions to this article from Ron Friedman, Senior Vice President, Marketing at Integreon (http://integreon.com/) and Neeraja Kandala, Senior Research Analyst with ValueNotes (http://www.valuenotes.biz/).
The Driving Forces
The demand for lower cost legal services resulted directly from increasingly cost-conscious U.S. and U.K. corporate clients. The difference between the law and other industries is that outsourcing in the legal market has been client rather than industry driven. In the legal profession, it was not law firms, but corporate legal departments that were the early proponents of the benefits of legal outsourcing. These major corporate clients are now increasing the pressure on their law firms to offer an alternative solution. Historically major law firms on both sides of the Atlantic achieved huge levels of profitability through leveraging their junior associates. The Los Angeles Daily Journal announced earlier this year that pay scales for first-year attorneys rose yet again with a number of firms hitting a staggering $160,000 annual starting salary. Law firm leaders insist that these increases have resulted from U.S. domestic economic forces, necessitating a policy of “Keeping up with the Joneses” in order to retain the top law school talent. The fully loaded cost to the firm of a junior associate at these salary levels will be in excess of $250,000 per annum. Partners look to bill these associates out at hourly rates of $300- $400 plus per hour. These rates simply do not wash any more with major corporate clients when it comes to routine level legal support work such as basic document drafting, litigation support or document review. Over the course of the last 12 months I have spoken to senior executives and managing partners at major law firms who have been advised in no uncertain terms that to retain their corporate client business they must cut their legal fees and offer an offshore alternative. KPMG has estimated that document review can account for between 58% and 90% of the total cost of litigation, and corporate clients view this type of legal work as routine. Law firms are being compelled by their clients to consider offshore outsourcing as a viable strategic solution. 2007 was the year that corporate clients confirmed they were no longer prepared simply to sign a blank check when it comes to paying their attorney’s bills.
Consolidation and Maturation of the industry
Since 2003, in India alone the number of companies offering legal process outsourcing services to both corporations and U.S. and U.K. law firms has grown to well over 100. For further information on the growing number of companies offering offshore legal services check out Ron Friedman and Joy London’s updated list at http://www.prismlegal.com/index.php?option=content&task=viewid=88&Itemid=70#List and the July 2007 ValueNotes report Offshoring Legal Services to India: an Update http://www.sourcingnotes.com/content/view/71/54/.
If 2007 can be categorized as the year when the number of LPO players across India exploded and major law firms began to explore the labor arbitrage benefits available through outsourcing offshore, then the picture will start to change again in 2008. Even while a large number of “mom and pop shops” were clinging on to the major players’ coat tails and jumping on the LPO bandwagon there was evidence of consolidation. This will only increase throughout 2008 and beyond. The dynamic movement within the LPO industry has not gone unnoticed in the private equity and venture capital sectors. The confidence that investors have demonstrated in the industry throughout 2007 illustrates the bright prospects for the coming year. In November this year Infosys, India’s second largest IT company, signaled their intent on entering the legal outsourcing market with the launch of their own legal process outsourcing operation. Established LPOs including Pangea3, Jurimatrix and SDD Global have attracted a significant level of private equity and venture capital funding. 2007 also witnessed the first acquisition of an onshore provider of outsourced legal services, CBF Group Inc, by a company traditionally viewed as being a leading offshore financial and legal services outsourcing company, Integreon. This type of activity has placed legal outsourcing companies in the position to scale up dramatically.According to the independent research company ValueNotes in their July 2007 report, “Offshoring Legal Services to India - An Update”, the revenues from legal services offshoring are forecast to grow from $146 million in 2006 to $640 million by the end of 2010. The legal outsourcing industry in India currently employs around 7,500 people and this number is expected to rise to 32,000 by 2010. Neeraja Kandala, the analyst behind the ValueNotes updated report, believes that consolidation is inevitable:
“Most Indian legal service vendors are self-funded, and may not have the capability to develop adequate marketing infrastructure without VC funding. For a large number of the smaller vendors, growth beyond a point will be difficult. While a few will manage to grow given their strong onshore presence, several smaller players will be vulnerable. On the other hand, the interest of large BPOs such as Infosys and HCL in this space is growing. As these BPOs look to build presence and scale rapidly, the acquisition of smaller vendors is an option. Though there is not much activity yet, over time we will see consolidation, with large BPOs and LPOs acquiring capacity and capability.”
Ron Friedman, Senior Vice-President of Marketing for Integreon and one of the world’s leading authorities on knowledge support strategies and the legal outsourcing industry generally provides his view on the consolidation of the LPO marketplace.
“As a general rule, industries consolidate as they mature. In the legal market, we see evidence of that now with electronic discovery vendors and large law firms. Even the traditionally fragmented legal software market is consolidating as LexisNexis and Thomson-West acquire smaller software players.
So I expect that the LPO market will not be an exception. Of course, guessing the time frame is always hard, but I suspect it will consolidate in the next two to three years. Whether that is a result of organic growth of some plus attrition of others or by acquisition is too early to say.
For LPOs, scale will drive consolidation. Scale is important for three reasons. First, it supports operating efficiencies. While lower offshore labor costs continue to offer significant savings today, in the future law firms will expect further savings from process improvements. Achieving these requires a large enough volume of work to gain the requisite experience and resources to re-engineer work flows. Second, scale means being able to offer a range of services which law firms will find valuable as they grow comfortable with offshoring and seek to outsource additional functions to a single supplier. And third, scale allows an LPO to recruit the best talent. Though talent is still readily available, the supply is limited, even in India. Larger operations will be able to invest in recruiting and, more importantly, to offer desirable career paths for the best workers.
Size will also help address whatever reservations law firms may have about offshoring. Law firms are always concerned about supplier stability and frequently have reservations about small ones. Larger LPOs will address this general concern and, as important, have both the reputation and references to allay other fears.”
Public Acknowledgement
Given that the majority of the leading LPOs can testify in 2007 to having received projects from AM law 200 ranked law firms, where are the testimonials, quotes, and press releases from the law firms’ managing partners? I am perfectly aware from my own experiences and numerous discussions with both the press and my peers at other LPOs that although major law firms have begun to explore the benefits associated through offshore legal process outsourcing they are also clearly still operating from a standpoint of reluctance to discuss their outsourcing relationships. There is a feeling within the industry that the major firms still view their own offshore legal outsourcing arrangements as a dirty little secret. Attempts by LPOs to include provisions within their contracts that allow publicizing of the deals have generally been met with rejection to date. Over the last 12 months I and many of my peers at leading LPOs have written articles for or been interviewed by journalists for publications as varied as Time magazine, the American Bar Association, Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Daily Journal, and the Association of Legal Administrators, to name but a few. The vast majority of these articles are still missing out on the “major firm” perspective. There is an unwillingness to go on record and confirm that the firm is outsourcing elements of their legal functions, whether back-office support or higher value legal work, to India. This is clearly frustrating for the LPOs who want to shout from the rooftops about every major client they have on their books.
I anticipate that this will change over the next couple of years. Don’t expect a tidal wave of confessions; however in the same way that the major firms’ initial interest in exploring legal offshoring was client driven, so will their eagerness to publicize the fact of their involvement. During the last year many of the law firm partners who have contacted both LawScribe and some of the other leading LPOs have been perfectly content to acknowledge that the reason they are approaching an LPO in the very first place is because their corporate clients are starting to demand that they offer an offshore element in their responses to RFPs or they will simply lose their business altogether.
As it was with the first uptake of offshore legal outsourcing, the public acknowledgement of the actual utilization of these services will of course be client driven. In 2007 we viewed the very first signs that an inherently risk-averse legal profession was publicly embracing the harsh reality that no industry was immune to the forces of globalization. Although the majority of the world’s leading law firms are still reluctant to go “on the record” and acknowledge their interest in offshore legal outsourcing, throughout 2007 AM Law 200 firms have been consistently approaching the world’s leading legal process outsourcing companies, submitting RFPs and inquiring about the various services on offer.
The picture has started to change. On occasions representatives from leading firms have joined their LPO providers on panel discussions at a variety of legal conferences that have begun to address the subject in 2007. I believe that in 2008 we will reach the point where having the law firm’s name out in the public domain as one that embraces offshore legal process outsourcing will actually be an attractive bonus for potential corporate clients, hence helping generate new business rather than turning people off.
Ron Friedman provides his own unique insight on whether 2008 will be the year that the major law firms come clean and publicly acknowledge that offshore legal outsourcing is firmly on their agendas:
“There is a common “tipping phenomenon” among large firms where no one wants to be first. Of course, a firm does go first and eventually a couple follow. Once a half-dozen or so have moved, the market tips – then, no one wants to be left behind not doing the new thing. Looking at adoption of e-mail and creation of marketing departments as examples, it seems to take at least five years for a cycle to play out. Today, firms are reluctant to acknowledge publicly that they offshore. Once a few go public, it will likely take little time for the rest to follow. And because of perceptions, more are likely to go public soon…
Law firms have many constituencies but clients come first. Large firm clients are, by and large, cost-sensitive in-house counsel. Firms can gain both a perception and actual advantage with clients by making clear they understand and are responding to the cost pressures facing their clients. Cutting associate or partner rates (whether directly or by discounting) is not attractive. And, talk notwithstanding, fixed and alternative fees have yet to gain significant share. So the number of ways to reduce costs is limited. As firms gain comfort with offshoring quality, they will understand that it is a good way to offer savings without affecting the firm’s core business. It therefore seems likely that market pressures will cause the early law firm adopters of outsourcing to also be the early “announcers.”Neeraja Kandala, of ValueNotes agrees that public acknowledgement is just around the corner:
“Early adopters among US and UK law firms are gaining comfort with the idea of offshoring. There are several law firms that are inhibited by various concerns. Those who have held back are now seeing the success stories of some of their competitors. I’m quite optimistic that once the law firms and corporates get more comfortable with the idea of offshoring, they will openly acknowledge their participation.”
Regulation, Accreditation and Certification
New companies without any real U.S. or U.K. physical presence or without the requisite legal background and qualifications are springing up all the time. The original ValueNotes report in December 2005 estimated in the region of 40 LPOs. 18 months later the numbers had swelled to well over 100. Many are simply jumping on the legal outsourcing bandwagon, seeing it as the latest “get rich quick” scheme. Last October LawScribe were forced to threaten legal action against a new LPO called LexGenius whose website was a virtual word for word plagiarism of the LawScribe site. It went as far as completely to copy the LawScribe CEO President, Kunoor Chopra’s, profile but simply to substitute in the name of the LexGenius founder!
There have been numerous calls from some of the major players within the industry relating to the formation of trade associations, independent training programs, regulatory bodies and best practice procedures. To date there has been no specific general consensus in these areas. It is likely that 2008 will witness the development of at a very minimum best practice rules for the industry.
2007 saw the first moves from within the industry towards accreditation and self-regulation. Russell Smith from SDD Global Solutions led one initiative with the formation of the first LPO trade association with the inaugural meeting held in Delhi in the summer of 2007. In November, through the forum of the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals, LawScribe led the first Legal Outsourcing Topic Chapter meeting attended by senior representatives from leading LPOs, BPOs, Law firms, academics and other interested stakeholders. 2007 also witnessed LPOs Jurimatrix and QuisLex, in association with one of India’s leading training organizations, develop the Global Legal Professional Certification Test.
Throughout 2008 I anticipate that both at legal conferences and on their own initiative senior representatives from the world’s leading LPOs will continue to meet and discuss these issues. While it is clear that many within the industry are committed to achieving higher standards to inspire confidence among their clients, to date there has been no general consensus as to how best to achieve this.
Deregulation of U.K. Legal Sector and its Impact on the Legal Process Outsourcing Industry.
In the U.K. the Legal Services Bill finally received Royal Assent on October 30, 2007. The true impact of this piece of legislation will only start to be felt in 2008 and beyond. The particular section of the Bill that will have the most far reaching consequences on the legal profession and provide a colossal boost to the growth of offshore legal outsourcing, is the provision allowing the formation of Alternative Business Structures. The summary to the Bill at paragraph 15 states as follows:
“Alternative Business Structures (ABS) will enable lawyers and non-lawyers to work together on an equal footing to deliver legal and other services. External investment will be possible”.
Put simply, non-lawyers can own and invest in law firms. To all intents and purposes this opens the doors to banks, insurance companies, supermarkets and other corporate entities both owning and investing in existing law firms or alternatively setting up their own firms and marketing legal services to the general public.Tony Williams, a former Clifford Chance Managing Partner, recently penned an article for the Times Online, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2718339.ece referencing ten trends that will shape the legal market over the coming years. At trend number 4 the author commented that:“Technology will enable projects to be ‘unbundled’. This may mean that parts of the project are outsourced to India and that they are done in a systemized manner. This could have a significant impact on the need for junior lawyers, particularly if they start to price themselves out of the market.”Trend number 6 stated:“High Street legal services will be fundamentally transformed by the Legal Services Act. A number of major brands will dominate the provision of retail legal services. Will that be law firms, or outsiders such as supermarkets or banks? It is too soon to tell whether existing law firms will be able to develop strong enough retail brands.”Finally, at trend number 7, the author went on to say:“If the Clementi reforms (the forerunner to the Legal Services Bill) are broadly successful, one can expect firms higher up the chain to take in outside capital and float on the market.”
Over the coming years there will be an influx into the legal market of major corporate entities that previously were prohibited from providing legal services. I do not anticipate that in the near future banks and supermarkets will necessarily be providing high end, premium legal advice, however I do believe that these corporations will come to dominate the provision of routine, retail legal services. None of these corporations will be bound by the traditional and antiquated existing methods of legal services delivery. They will simply look for the most cost-effective method of providing legal services to the general public. These companies either already have offshore locations or have the capability to scale up significantly quicker than even the world’s largest law firms to provide legal support from offshore destinations. This in turn will have a domino effect and will inspire the world’s leading law firms to look at new operational models for delivering routine legal support, with offshore legal outsourcing being the logical choice.
In addition, the potential floatation of some firms “higher up the chain” only reinforces my belief that this will give the offshore legal outsourcing industry a huge boost. When major firms also have responsibility to their shareholders, as well as their clients, then the salaries that they pay their junior associates to perform relatively routine, offshoreable level legal work, will raise more than a few eyebrows. When corporate clients increasingly demand that law firms provide an offshore solution in responses to Requests for Proposals, shareholders will not be happy if the firm is incapable of responding to these requests.
The face of the legal profession in the U.K. is changing dramatically. These changes will have far reaching, cross-Atlantic repercussions. The U.K. and U.S. legal markets are inextricably linked, with many of the world’s leading law firms having offices on both sides of the pond. Together the U.S. and U.K. account for over 90% of the world’s $250 billion legal services market. What happens in the U.K. does not stay in the U.K. but will soon be felt all around the Western legal world.
The Future – What can’t be done?
I firmly believe that within 5 years, in a much consolidated industry, offshoring routine level legal work will have become the norm for the world’s leading law firms and corporations. Of the current 100 plus LPO providers, many will have ceased to exist and have been swallowed up by BPOs or will simply have gone out of business. We will have witnessed the development of clear and unequivocal ethical standards of practice and procedure relating specifically to the industry. New destinations and talent pools in Africa and South America which are currently virtually untapped will be in the process of being developed as the rupee continues its rise against an ever-decreasing dollar. I believe that as advances in technology continue to grow exponentially and the quality of the offshore attorneys improves that the question will move beyond what can offshore employees do to what can’t they do?
About the Author :
Mark Ross is a professional member of the IAOP, and Chapter Chair of the IAOP Legal Outsourcing Topic Chapter. He was formerly a partner at the UK law firm Underwoods Solicitors Underwoods is referred to as “a highly influential flagship firm and model for other firms…It has pioneered offshoring of legal work.”
Mark also developed a case management system for the offshoring of personal injury cases to South Africa. He immigrated to Los Angeles and joined LawScribe in 2006. He has been a regular speaker at legal conferences on outsourcing and offshoring and have had numerous articles published in legal journals on subjects as varied as: death of the hourly rate, liberalization of the Indian legal sector and the ongoing salary hikes by the US and UK’s top law firms. Mark can be contacted at mross@law-scribe.com or (818) 442-4615.
Views expressed here belong to the author and do not represent those of the ThinkingStreet or the author’s employer.
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://thinkingstreet.com/business/2008/02/20/legal-process-outsourcing-lpo-2007-and-beyond-2/and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”.
Rajashree on -->20 Feb 2008
Over the course of the last couple of years leading law firms have begun to wake up to the reality that we live and operate in a global marketplace. Technology enables an increasing array of legal support services and higher value legal work to be outsourced offshore. The legal profession is now starting to take advantage of the labor arbitrage that has been exploited by other industries for well over a decade. Throughout 2006 and 2007 the offshore legal outsourcing market also witnessed the entry of some of the world’s largest Business Process Outsourcing (BPOs) companies together with a significant level of venture capital and private equity funding.
This article will examine the driving forces behind the emergence of the LPO industry and how it has developed over the last few years. I will also be offering some insight into the direction the industry will take in 2008 and beyond. Finally, I intend to take a more detailed look at the impact that the recently passed UK Legal Services Bill will have on the offshore legal outsourcing market. I am both delighted and fortunate to have contributions to this article from Ron Friedman, Senior Vice President, Marketing at Integreon (http://integreon.com/) and Neeraja Kandala, Senior Research Analyst with ValueNotes (http://www.valuenotes.biz/).
The Driving Forces
The demand for lower cost legal services resulted directly from increasingly cost-conscious U.S. and U.K. corporate clients. The difference between the law and other industries is that outsourcing in the legal market has been client rather than industry driven. In the legal profession, it was not law firms, but corporate legal departments that were the early proponents of the benefits of legal outsourcing. These major corporate clients are now increasing the pressure on their law firms to offer an alternative solution. Historically major law firms on both sides of the Atlantic achieved huge levels of profitability through leveraging their junior associates. The Los Angeles Daily Journal announced earlier this year that pay scales for first-year attorneys rose yet again with a number of firms hitting a staggering $160,000 annual starting salary. Law firm leaders insist that these increases have resulted from U.S. domestic economic forces, necessitating a policy of “Keeping up with the Joneses” in order to retain the top law school talent. The fully loaded cost to the firm of a junior associate at these salary levels will be in excess of $250,000 per annum. Partners look to bill these associates out at hourly rates of $300- $400 plus per hour. These rates simply do not wash any more with major corporate clients when it comes to routine level legal support work such as basic document drafting, litigation support or document review. Over the course of the last 12 months I have spoken to senior executives and managing partners at major law firms who have been advised in no uncertain terms that to retain their corporate client business they must cut their legal fees and offer an offshore alternative. KPMG has estimated that document review can account for between 58% and 90% of the total cost of litigation, and corporate clients view this type of legal work as routine. Law firms are being compelled by their clients to consider offshore outsourcing as a viable strategic solution. 2007 was the year that corporate clients confirmed they were no longer prepared simply to sign a blank check when it comes to paying their attorney’s bills.
Consolidation and Maturation of the industry
Since 2003, in India alone the number of companies offering legal process outsourcing services to both corporations and U.S. and U.K. law firms has grown to well over 100. For further information on the growing number of companies offering offshore legal services check out Ron Friedman and Joy London’s updated list at http://www.prismlegal.com/index.php?option=content&task=viewid=88&Itemid=70#List and the July 2007 ValueNotes report Offshoring Legal Services to India: an Update http://www.sourcingnotes.com/content/view/71/54/.
If 2007 can be categorized as the year when the number of LPO players across India exploded and major law firms began to explore the labor arbitrage benefits available through outsourcing offshore, then the picture will start to change again in 2008. Even while a large number of “mom and pop shops” were clinging on to the major players’ coat tails and jumping on the LPO bandwagon there was evidence of consolidation. This will only increase throughout 2008 and beyond. The dynamic movement within the LPO industry has not gone unnoticed in the private equity and venture capital sectors. The confidence that investors have demonstrated in the industry throughout 2007 illustrates the bright prospects for the coming year. In November this year Infosys, India’s second largest IT company, signaled their intent on entering the legal outsourcing market with the launch of their own legal process outsourcing operation. Established LPOs including Pangea3, Jurimatrix and SDD Global have attracted a significant level of private equity and venture capital funding. 2007 also witnessed the first acquisition of an onshore provider of outsourced legal services, CBF Group Inc, by a company traditionally viewed as being a leading offshore financial and legal services outsourcing company, Integreon. This type of activity has placed legal outsourcing companies in the position to scale up dramatically.According to the independent research company ValueNotes in their July 2007 report, “Offshoring Legal Services to India - An Update”, the revenues from legal services offshoring are forecast to grow from $146 million in 2006 to $640 million by the end of 2010. The legal outsourcing industry in India currently employs around 7,500 people and this number is expected to rise to 32,000 by 2010. Neeraja Kandala, the analyst behind the ValueNotes updated report, believes that consolidation is inevitable:
“Most Indian legal service vendors are self-funded, and may not have the capability to develop adequate marketing infrastructure without VC funding. For a large number of the smaller vendors, growth beyond a point will be difficult. While a few will manage to grow given their strong onshore presence, several smaller players will be vulnerable. On the other hand, the interest of large BPOs such as Infosys and HCL in this space is growing. As these BPOs look to build presence and scale rapidly, the acquisition of smaller vendors is an option. Though there is not much activity yet, over time we will see consolidation, with large BPOs and LPOs acquiring capacity and capability.”
Ron Friedman, Senior Vice-President of Marketing for Integreon and one of the world’s leading authorities on knowledge support strategies and the legal outsourcing industry generally provides his view on the consolidation of the LPO marketplace.
“As a general rule, industries consolidate as they mature. In the legal market, we see evidence of that now with electronic discovery vendors and large law firms. Even the traditionally fragmented legal software market is consolidating as LexisNexis and Thomson-West acquire smaller software players.
So I expect that the LPO market will not be an exception. Of course, guessing the time frame is always hard, but I suspect it will consolidate in the next two to three years. Whether that is a result of organic growth of some plus attrition of others or by acquisition is too early to say.
For LPOs, scale will drive consolidation. Scale is important for three reasons. First, it supports operating efficiencies. While lower offshore labor costs continue to offer significant savings today, in the future law firms will expect further savings from process improvements. Achieving these requires a large enough volume of work to gain the requisite experience and resources to re-engineer work flows. Second, scale means being able to offer a range of services which law firms will find valuable as they grow comfortable with offshoring and seek to outsource additional functions to a single supplier. And third, scale allows an LPO to recruit the best talent. Though talent is still readily available, the supply is limited, even in India. Larger operations will be able to invest in recruiting and, more importantly, to offer desirable career paths for the best workers.
Size will also help address whatever reservations law firms may have about offshoring. Law firms are always concerned about supplier stability and frequently have reservations about small ones. Larger LPOs will address this general concern and, as important, have both the reputation and references to allay other fears.”
Public Acknowledgement
Given that the majority of the leading LPOs can testify in 2007 to having received projects from AM law 200 ranked law firms, where are the testimonials, quotes, and press releases from the law firms’ managing partners? I am perfectly aware from my own experiences and numerous discussions with both the press and my peers at other LPOs that although major law firms have begun to explore the benefits associated through offshore legal process outsourcing they are also clearly still operating from a standpoint of reluctance to discuss their outsourcing relationships. There is a feeling within the industry that the major firms still view their own offshore legal outsourcing arrangements as a dirty little secret. Attempts by LPOs to include provisions within their contracts that allow publicizing of the deals have generally been met with rejection to date. Over the last 12 months I and many of my peers at leading LPOs have written articles for or been interviewed by journalists for publications as varied as Time magazine, the American Bar Association, Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Daily Journal, and the Association of Legal Administrators, to name but a few. The vast majority of these articles are still missing out on the “major firm” perspective. There is an unwillingness to go on record and confirm that the firm is outsourcing elements of their legal functions, whether back-office support or higher value legal work, to India. This is clearly frustrating for the LPOs who want to shout from the rooftops about every major client they have on their books.
I anticipate that this will change over the next couple of years. Don’t expect a tidal wave of confessions; however in the same way that the major firms’ initial interest in exploring legal offshoring was client driven, so will their eagerness to publicize the fact of their involvement. During the last year many of the law firm partners who have contacted both LawScribe and some of the other leading LPOs have been perfectly content to acknowledge that the reason they are approaching an LPO in the very first place is because their corporate clients are starting to demand that they offer an offshore element in their responses to RFPs or they will simply lose their business altogether.
As it was with the first uptake of offshore legal outsourcing, the public acknowledgement of the actual utilization of these services will of course be client driven. In 2007 we viewed the very first signs that an inherently risk-averse legal profession was publicly embracing the harsh reality that no industry was immune to the forces of globalization. Although the majority of the world’s leading law firms are still reluctant to go “on the record” and acknowledge their interest in offshore legal outsourcing, throughout 2007 AM Law 200 firms have been consistently approaching the world’s leading legal process outsourcing companies, submitting RFPs and inquiring about the various services on offer.
The picture has started to change. On occasions representatives from leading firms have joined their LPO providers on panel discussions at a variety of legal conferences that have begun to address the subject in 2007. I believe that in 2008 we will reach the point where having the law firm’s name out in the public domain as one that embraces offshore legal process outsourcing will actually be an attractive bonus for potential corporate clients, hence helping generate new business rather than turning people off.
Ron Friedman provides his own unique insight on whether 2008 will be the year that the major law firms come clean and publicly acknowledge that offshore legal outsourcing is firmly on their agendas:
“There is a common “tipping phenomenon” among large firms where no one wants to be first. Of course, a firm does go first and eventually a couple follow. Once a half-dozen or so have moved, the market tips – then, no one wants to be left behind not doing the new thing. Looking at adoption of e-mail and creation of marketing departments as examples, it seems to take at least five years for a cycle to play out. Today, firms are reluctant to acknowledge publicly that they offshore. Once a few go public, it will likely take little time for the rest to follow. And because of perceptions, more are likely to go public soon…
Law firms have many constituencies but clients come first. Large firm clients are, by and large, cost-sensitive in-house counsel. Firms can gain both a perception and actual advantage with clients by making clear they understand and are responding to the cost pressures facing their clients. Cutting associate or partner rates (whether directly or by discounting) is not attractive. And, talk notwithstanding, fixed and alternative fees have yet to gain significant share. So the number of ways to reduce costs is limited. As firms gain comfort with offshoring quality, they will understand that it is a good way to offer savings without affecting the firm’s core business. It therefore seems likely that market pressures will cause the early law firm adopters of outsourcing to also be the early “announcers.”Neeraja Kandala, of ValueNotes agrees that public acknowledgement is just around the corner:
“Early adopters among US and UK law firms are gaining comfort with the idea of offshoring. There are several law firms that are inhibited by various concerns. Those who have held back are now seeing the success stories of some of their competitors. I’m quite optimistic that once the law firms and corporates get more comfortable with the idea of offshoring, they will openly acknowledge their participation.”
Regulation, Accreditation and Certification
New companies without any real U.S. or U.K. physical presence or without the requisite legal background and qualifications are springing up all the time. The original ValueNotes report in December 2005 estimated in the region of 40 LPOs. 18 months later the numbers had swelled to well over 100. Many are simply jumping on the legal outsourcing bandwagon, seeing it as the latest “get rich quick” scheme. Last October LawScribe were forced to threaten legal action against a new LPO called LexGenius whose website was a virtual word for word plagiarism of the LawScribe site. It went as far as completely to copy the LawScribe CEO President, Kunoor Chopra’s, profile but simply to substitute in the name of the LexGenius founder!
There have been numerous calls from some of the major players within the industry relating to the formation of trade associations, independent training programs, regulatory bodies and best practice procedures. To date there has been no specific general consensus in these areas. It is likely that 2008 will witness the development of at a very minimum best practice rules for the industry.
2007 saw the first moves from within the industry towards accreditation and self-regulation. Russell Smith from SDD Global Solutions led one initiative with the formation of the first LPO trade association with the inaugural meeting held in Delhi in the summer of 2007. In November, through the forum of the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals, LawScribe led the first Legal Outsourcing Topic Chapter meeting attended by senior representatives from leading LPOs, BPOs, Law firms, academics and other interested stakeholders. 2007 also witnessed LPOs Jurimatrix and QuisLex, in association with one of India’s leading training organizations, develop the Global Legal Professional Certification Test.
Throughout 2008 I anticipate that both at legal conferences and on their own initiative senior representatives from the world’s leading LPOs will continue to meet and discuss these issues. While it is clear that many within the industry are committed to achieving higher standards to inspire confidence among their clients, to date there has been no general consensus as to how best to achieve this.
Deregulation of U.K. Legal Sector and its Impact on the Legal Process Outsourcing Industry.
In the U.K. the Legal Services Bill finally received Royal Assent on October 30, 2007. The true impact of this piece of legislation will only start to be felt in 2008 and beyond. The particular section of the Bill that will have the most far reaching consequences on the legal profession and provide a colossal boost to the growth of offshore legal outsourcing, is the provision allowing the formation of Alternative Business Structures. The summary to the Bill at paragraph 15 states as follows:
“Alternative Business Structures (ABS) will enable lawyers and non-lawyers to work together on an equal footing to deliver legal and other services. External investment will be possible”.
Put simply, non-lawyers can own and invest in law firms. To all intents and purposes this opens the doors to banks, insurance companies, supermarkets and other corporate entities both owning and investing in existing law firms or alternatively setting up their own firms and marketing legal services to the general public.Tony Williams, a former Clifford Chance Managing Partner, recently penned an article for the Times Online, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2718339.ece referencing ten trends that will shape the legal market over the coming years. At trend number 4 the author commented that:“Technology will enable projects to be ‘unbundled’. This may mean that parts of the project are outsourced to India and that they are done in a systemized manner. This could have a significant impact on the need for junior lawyers, particularly if they start to price themselves out of the market.”Trend number 6 stated:“High Street legal services will be fundamentally transformed by the Legal Services Act. A number of major brands will dominate the provision of retail legal services. Will that be law firms, or outsiders such as supermarkets or banks? It is too soon to tell whether existing law firms will be able to develop strong enough retail brands.”Finally, at trend number 7, the author went on to say:“If the Clementi reforms (the forerunner to the Legal Services Bill) are broadly successful, one can expect firms higher up the chain to take in outside capital and float on the market.”
Over the coming years there will be an influx into the legal market of major corporate entities that previously were prohibited from providing legal services. I do not anticipate that in the near future banks and supermarkets will necessarily be providing high end, premium legal advice, however I do believe that these corporations will come to dominate the provision of routine, retail legal services. None of these corporations will be bound by the traditional and antiquated existing methods of legal services delivery. They will simply look for the most cost-effective method of providing legal services to the general public. These companies either already have offshore locations or have the capability to scale up significantly quicker than even the world’s largest law firms to provide legal support from offshore destinations. This in turn will have a domino effect and will inspire the world’s leading law firms to look at new operational models for delivering routine legal support, with offshore legal outsourcing being the logical choice.
In addition, the potential floatation of some firms “higher up the chain” only reinforces my belief that this will give the offshore legal outsourcing industry a huge boost. When major firms also have responsibility to their shareholders, as well as their clients, then the salaries that they pay their junior associates to perform relatively routine, offshoreable level legal work, will raise more than a few eyebrows. When corporate clients increasingly demand that law firms provide an offshore solution in responses to Requests for Proposals, shareholders will not be happy if the firm is incapable of responding to these requests.
The face of the legal profession in the U.K. is changing dramatically. These changes will have far reaching, cross-Atlantic repercussions. The U.K. and U.S. legal markets are inextricably linked, with many of the world’s leading law firms having offices on both sides of the pond. Together the U.S. and U.K. account for over 90% of the world’s $250 billion legal services market. What happens in the U.K. does not stay in the U.K. but will soon be felt all around the Western legal world.
The Future – What can’t be done?
I firmly believe that within 5 years, in a much consolidated industry, offshoring routine level legal work will have become the norm for the world’s leading law firms and corporations. Of the current 100 plus LPO providers, many will have ceased to exist and have been swallowed up by BPOs or will simply have gone out of business. We will have witnessed the development of clear and unequivocal ethical standards of practice and procedure relating specifically to the industry. New destinations and talent pools in Africa and South America which are currently virtually untapped will be in the process of being developed as the rupee continues its rise against an ever-decreasing dollar. I believe that as advances in technology continue to grow exponentially and the quality of the offshore attorneys improves that the question will move beyond what can offshore employees do to what can’t they do?
About the Author :
Mark Ross is a professional member of the IAOP, and Chapter Chair of the IAOP Legal Outsourcing Topic Chapter. He was formerly a partner at the UK law firm Underwoods Solicitors Underwoods is referred to as “a highly influential flagship firm and model for other firms…It has pioneered offshoring of legal work.”
Mark also developed a case management system for the offshoring of personal injury cases to South Africa. He immigrated to Los Angeles and joined LawScribe in 2006. He has been a regular speaker at legal conferences on outsourcing and offshoring and have had numerous articles published in legal journals on subjects as varied as: death of the hourly rate, liberalization of the Indian legal sector and the ongoing salary hikes by the US and UK’s top law firms. Mark can be contacted at mross@law-scribe.com or (818) 442-4615.
Views expressed here belong to the author and do not represent those of the ThinkingStreet or the author’s employer.
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://thinkingstreet.com/business/2008/02/20/legal-process-outsourcing-lpo-2007-and-beyond-2/and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
U.S. Legal Work Booms in India
U.S. Legal Work Booms in India
New Outsourcing Industry Is Growing 60 Percent Annually
By Rama Lakshmi
Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, May 11, 2008; Page A20
GURGAON, India -- When Aashish Sharma graduated from law school two years ago, his father had visions of seeing him argue in an Indian court and eventually become an honorable judge.
Instead, Sharma, 25, now sits all day in front of a computer in a plush, air-conditioned suburban office doing litigation research and drafting legal contracts for U.S. companies and law firms. He is part of a booming new outsourcing industry in India that employs thousands of English-speaking lawyers such as him to do legal work at a small fraction of the cost of hiring American lawyers.
"It is much better than going to court in India and dealing with all kinds of rough people. Working in legal outsourcing is a happy career move for me, although my father does not fully understand what I am doing here after my education in Indian law," said Sharma, who began working in February for an outsourcing company called Quatrro. "I am getting valuable exposure to the American judicial system, corporate law and their way of working."
Legal process outsourcing is being called the next big thing in Indian business. It marks India's climb up the chain of outsourcing jobs -- from low-end, back-office service functions in call centers to high-value, skilled legal work.
In the past three years, the legal outsourcing industry here has grown about 60 percent annually. According to a report by research firm ValueNotes, the industry will employ about 24,000 people and earn revenue of $640 million by 2010.
Indian workers who once helped with legal transcription now offer services that include research, litigation support, document discovery and review, drafting of contracts and patent writing. The industry offers an attractive career path for many of the 300,000 Indians who enroll in law schools every year. India and the United States share a common-law legal system rooted in Britain's, and both conduct proceedings in English.
The explosion of opportunity here was triggered by what are known as "e-discovery laws," a set of U.S. regulations established in 2006 to govern the storage and management of electronic data for federal court actions. Overnight, the volume of information to be stored, archived, filtered and reviewed for litigation swelled. But there were not enough affordable lawyers or paralegals to do the work in the United States.
"The new e-discovery rules sent American companies scurrying all over the place. Neither the corporates nor the law firms in America are geared to do this kind of work at short notice. And that is where the Indian players come in. We can bring together a large number of skilled lawyers in no time at all and at one-fifth the cost," said Srinivas Pingali, executive vice president at Quatrro, which also offers technical support, credit card fraud management, consumer research and architectural services for American clients, among other work.
Pingali said that the economic slowdown in the United States has not hurt his company's business. In fact, legal work related to bankruptcies has increased.
Because of the sensitive nature of legal work, Indian outsourcing companies have tried to allay the concerns about confidentiality. They have installed closed-circuit televisions, network safeguards and hack-proof servers.
Many outsourcing companies in India already have those security measures in place because they have been handling the credit card and banking operations of global companies for more than a decade. Industry members say that outsourcing of legal work to India is a natural next step.
"Ninety percent of a lawyer's work is legal research and drafting, and all this can now be offshored to India," said Russell Smith, who worked in a Manhattan law firm called SmithDehn before moving to India to set up an outsourcing company in 2006. "A large portion of our fees in the U.S. is because of office rent. It is often a big decision to hire one attorney in the U.S. In India, we can hire 10 at a time and train them all at once."
Smith's Indian company, SDD Global Solutions, handled much of the legal work for the film "Borat." Other clients include the Washington-based firm Appleton & Associates and U.S. movie studios and television networks.
"My people in India can do everything from here, except sign the opinion letter and appear in an American court," he said.
Smith's Indian office recently researched and drafted the motion papers for the dismissal of a libel case against the producers of HBO's "Da Ali G Show." Smith said that if it had not been for the cheaper option of outsourcing, the producers would have settled.
For many law graduates, the contrast between the Indian and American judicial systems comes as a surprise. India's overburdened courts, with 13 judges for every 1 million people, are characterized by backlogs and delays.
Sharma, the Quatrro employee, said he was fascinated by the speed of proceedings and judgments in the American system.
Indian employees have to undergo rigorous training in U.S. legal and judicial practices before they can take on projects. But lawyers with experience in the United States say there are challenges in training Indians.
"They write in flowery, British-style English," said Kunoor Chopra, who came to India to set up the offshore legal support firm LawScribe in 2004 after working for Fulbright & Jaworski in Los Angeles. "It is almost like an unlearning process. They have to be retrained to write in crisp, short sentences. A licensed attorney from California comes to train all my new employees in contract writing, review and research."
Meanwhile, Sharma said he learns something new every day doing legal work for Americans.
"I have learned so many new words," he said. "I keep Dictionary.com on standby. Recently, I had to look up the word 'esquire.' I always thought it meant a respectable gentleman. But in America, it means an attorney."
New Outsourcing Industry Is Growing 60 Percent Annually
By Rama Lakshmi
Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, May 11, 2008; Page A20
GURGAON, India -- When Aashish Sharma graduated from law school two years ago, his father had visions of seeing him argue in an Indian court and eventually become an honorable judge.
Instead, Sharma, 25, now sits all day in front of a computer in a plush, air-conditioned suburban office doing litigation research and drafting legal contracts for U.S. companies and law firms. He is part of a booming new outsourcing industry in India that employs thousands of English-speaking lawyers such as him to do legal work at a small fraction of the cost of hiring American lawyers.
"It is much better than going to court in India and dealing with all kinds of rough people. Working in legal outsourcing is a happy career move for me, although my father does not fully understand what I am doing here after my education in Indian law," said Sharma, who began working in February for an outsourcing company called Quatrro. "I am getting valuable exposure to the American judicial system, corporate law and their way of working."
Legal process outsourcing is being called the next big thing in Indian business. It marks India's climb up the chain of outsourcing jobs -- from low-end, back-office service functions in call centers to high-value, skilled legal work.
In the past three years, the legal outsourcing industry here has grown about 60 percent annually. According to a report by research firm ValueNotes, the industry will employ about 24,000 people and earn revenue of $640 million by 2010.
Indian workers who once helped with legal transcription now offer services that include research, litigation support, document discovery and review, drafting of contracts and patent writing. The industry offers an attractive career path for many of the 300,000 Indians who enroll in law schools every year. India and the United States share a common-law legal system rooted in Britain's, and both conduct proceedings in English.
The explosion of opportunity here was triggered by what are known as "e-discovery laws," a set of U.S. regulations established in 2006 to govern the storage and management of electronic data for federal court actions. Overnight, the volume of information to be stored, archived, filtered and reviewed for litigation swelled. But there were not enough affordable lawyers or paralegals to do the work in the United States.
"The new e-discovery rules sent American companies scurrying all over the place. Neither the corporates nor the law firms in America are geared to do this kind of work at short notice. And that is where the Indian players come in. We can bring together a large number of skilled lawyers in no time at all and at one-fifth the cost," said Srinivas Pingali, executive vice president at Quatrro, which also offers technical support, credit card fraud management, consumer research and architectural services for American clients, among other work.
Pingali said that the economic slowdown in the United States has not hurt his company's business. In fact, legal work related to bankruptcies has increased.
Because of the sensitive nature of legal work, Indian outsourcing companies have tried to allay the concerns about confidentiality. They have installed closed-circuit televisions, network safeguards and hack-proof servers.
Many outsourcing companies in India already have those security measures in place because they have been handling the credit card and banking operations of global companies for more than a decade. Industry members say that outsourcing of legal work to India is a natural next step.
"Ninety percent of a lawyer's work is legal research and drafting, and all this can now be offshored to India," said Russell Smith, who worked in a Manhattan law firm called SmithDehn before moving to India to set up an outsourcing company in 2006. "A large portion of our fees in the U.S. is because of office rent. It is often a big decision to hire one attorney in the U.S. In India, we can hire 10 at a time and train them all at once."
Smith's Indian company, SDD Global Solutions, handled much of the legal work for the film "Borat." Other clients include the Washington-based firm Appleton & Associates and U.S. movie studios and television networks.
"My people in India can do everything from here, except sign the opinion letter and appear in an American court," he said.
Smith's Indian office recently researched and drafted the motion papers for the dismissal of a libel case against the producers of HBO's "Da Ali G Show." Smith said that if it had not been for the cheaper option of outsourcing, the producers would have settled.
For many law graduates, the contrast between the Indian and American judicial systems comes as a surprise. India's overburdened courts, with 13 judges for every 1 million people, are characterized by backlogs and delays.
Sharma, the Quatrro employee, said he was fascinated by the speed of proceedings and judgments in the American system.
Indian employees have to undergo rigorous training in U.S. legal and judicial practices before they can take on projects. But lawyers with experience in the United States say there are challenges in training Indians.
"They write in flowery, British-style English," said Kunoor Chopra, who came to India to set up the offshore legal support firm LawScribe in 2004 after working for Fulbright & Jaworski in Los Angeles. "It is almost like an unlearning process. They have to be retrained to write in crisp, short sentences. A licensed attorney from California comes to train all my new employees in contract writing, review and research."
Meanwhile, Sharma said he learns something new every day doing legal work for Americans.
"I have learned so many new words," he said. "I keep Dictionary.com on standby. Recently, I had to look up the word 'esquire.' I always thought it meant a respectable gentleman. But in America, it means an attorney."
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
The significance of court rules
While exploring the sources of law in American legal system it is interesting to find that the court rules, one of the elements in enacted law, function as the backbone of the judicial system. The court rules which prescribe the procedures to be adopted by the courts give extensive and clear cut directions. On a comparative note with the Indian context, the federal system and the states have their own court rules enacted by their respective appropriate bodies. In the states, the court rules are placed in a higher status above the statute passed by the legislature and the court rules always prevail over the statutes. Unlike the state court rules, the federal court rules have the same force as federal statutes. The Advisory committee appointed by the Judicial Conference of the United States drafts the federal court rules. The procedural rules have always been the curator of the common man against the callousness of the judiciary and the executive.
Author:Chandini Nair
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
While exploring the sources of law in American legal system it is interesting to find that the court rules, one of the elements in enacted law, function as the backbone of the judicial system. The court rules which prescribe the procedures to be adopted by the courts give extensive and clear cut directions. On a comparative note with the Indian context, the federal system and the states have their own court rules enacted by their respective appropriate bodies. In the states, the court rules are placed in a higher status above the statute passed by the legislature and the court rules always prevail over the statutes. Unlike the state court rules, the federal court rules have the same force as federal statutes. The Advisory committee appointed by the Judicial Conference of the United States drafts the federal court rules. The procedural rules have always been the curator of the common man against the callousness of the judiciary and the executive.
Author:Chandini Nair
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
America too respects!
Shockingly even in the largest democracy of the world *“ the judge has contempt power to punish summarily any disruption in the court room or other display of disrespect to the court.” In India ,the topic, ‘Contempt of Court ’ has always been one which is discussed and debated over.
Though both the nations have derived its set of laws from the English common law system, the revolutionary evolution which shaped the American legal system is much appreciable. The liberal view of the country is enviable. Whereas, in India , the legal system has not freed itself from the hangover of the colonial days.
The theory of Contempt of Court can be related to that of ‘Divine Rule Theory’, which was dethroned a couple of centuries back by the civilized world. The fact that even the liberal Americans who uphold the individual freedom than any other country in the world does not condemn the ‘contempt of court’ is something worth probing into.
(‘Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States ’-William Burnham
Ch.V,The Judicial System,pg.168)
Author:AnnieJeen
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi
Shockingly even in the largest democracy of the world *“ the judge has contempt power to punish summarily any disruption in the court room or other display of disrespect to the court.” In India ,the topic, ‘Contempt of Court ’ has always been one which is discussed and debated over.
Though both the nations have derived its set of laws from the English common law system, the revolutionary evolution which shaped the American legal system is much appreciable. The liberal view of the country is enviable. Whereas, in India , the legal system has not freed itself from the hangover of the colonial days.
The theory of Contempt of Court can be related to that of ‘Divine Rule Theory’, which was dethroned a couple of centuries back by the civilized world. The fact that even the liberal Americans who uphold the individual freedom than any other country in the world does not condemn the ‘contempt of court’ is something worth probing into.
(‘Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States ’-William Burnham
Ch.V,The Judicial System,pg.168)
Author:AnnieJeen
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi
Monday, March 31, 2008
General overview on American legal system
Law of the United States was originally derived from the common law system of English. The supreme Law of the land is the United States Constitution, and under this constitution, congress enacts many laws and treaties. Under the supremacy clause, constitution has given wide powers to congress to make laws and to enact them.
In the United States, the law is derived from mainly four sources. Constitutional law, Administrative law, Statues and common law. Among these the most important source of law is the Constitutional law. For example, if congress enacts a law which is contrary to the Constitutional law then the court can invalidate it as unconstitutional. Treaties are also considered as sources of law. If the congress does not interfere with a court rule, then it becomes a law. Court rules are framed by judicial conference. This conference are made by advisory committee consisted of judges, scholars and person’s specialized in particular branch of law. Some of the court rules are Federal rule of civil procedure, Federal rule of criminal procedure etc.
Common law is also an important source of law. The principle behind why courts refer to case laws when there is no enacted laws is stare decisis. The rule helps the court to look back to past cases for deciding future matters. It allows the court to decide the present matter as decided in past.
State laws, each state is separate from the other and has its own sovereign powers.
Fifty states have their own state constitutions and state governments, state enacts their own laws and the federal courts cannot extend its jurisdiction to interfere in state matters. They retain plenary powers to make laws covering anything not preempted by federal constitution.
State Constitutions delegated its law making power to number of agencies, public bodies and other governmental departments in some particular matters. All states constitution, statutes and administrative laws are subject to judicial interpretation by the court like the Federal.
Finally American citizens are bound by a number of federal and state laws, which they themselves find it difficult to trace out under which geographical location they fall to determine a case. Moreover efforts are still going on to codify a uniform state law, which is not yet achieved.
Author:RajadasKurias
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Law of the United States was originally derived from the common law system of English. The supreme Law of the land is the United States Constitution, and under this constitution, congress enacts many laws and treaties. Under the supremacy clause, constitution has given wide powers to congress to make laws and to enact them.
In the United States, the law is derived from mainly four sources. Constitutional law, Administrative law, Statues and common law. Among these the most important source of law is the Constitutional law. For example, if congress enacts a law which is contrary to the Constitutional law then the court can invalidate it as unconstitutional. Treaties are also considered as sources of law. If the congress does not interfere with a court rule, then it becomes a law. Court rules are framed by judicial conference. This conference are made by advisory committee consisted of judges, scholars and person’s specialized in particular branch of law. Some of the court rules are Federal rule of civil procedure, Federal rule of criminal procedure etc.
Common law is also an important source of law. The principle behind why courts refer to case laws when there is no enacted laws is stare decisis. The rule helps the court to look back to past cases for deciding future matters. It allows the court to decide the present matter as decided in past.
State laws, each state is separate from the other and has its own sovereign powers.
Fifty states have their own state constitutions and state governments, state enacts their own laws and the federal courts cannot extend its jurisdiction to interfere in state matters. They retain plenary powers to make laws covering anything not preempted by federal constitution.
State Constitutions delegated its law making power to number of agencies, public bodies and other governmental departments in some particular matters. All states constitution, statutes and administrative laws are subject to judicial interpretation by the court like the Federal.
Finally American citizens are bound by a number of federal and state laws, which they themselves find it difficult to trace out under which geographical location they fall to determine a case. Moreover efforts are still going on to codify a uniform state law, which is not yet achieved.
Author:RajadasKurias
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Force of Law
The legal systems of both India and the US have both originated from the Common law. No wonder why the basic principles of law are very similar or almost the same. Law gets its existence from various sources like customs, common law, statutes, precedents etc. Austin’s famous definition of law as the command of the sovereign gives an idea about the binding nature of law. As we live in an organized structure of a system called ‘state’ we are bound to follow certain rules and regulations in order for the state to maintain peace and security. Even if it is not mandatory to follow the law of the land, people have a fear of law. Or it is rather self control or self restriction driven by moral principles. Because we live in a society, people generally follow a pattern of behavior that is acceptable by all including the state. There need not be any specific law for that. Law enables the State to handle any situation where individuals start behaving against the acceptable patterns.
Law has become very diverse keeping in pace with the various transactions that people enter in to. Law is keeping abreast of the latest developments in the areas of business, communications and technology. Even if the law has various sources, it has to accept the changes that have occurred in the society and mindset of the people. What good can the law serve if it does not cater to the interests of the people? After all the ultimate purpose of a legal system is administration of justice and justice is for the people. Out of the various sources of law like customs, statutes, precedents etc, there might be certain principles that will not hold good in today’s situation. Most legal systems of the civilized world are designed in such a way as to be amended as and when the society changes in that regard. Precedents as a source of law play a very important role. There are certain basic principles of law that never requires any change. For e.g., the natural law. This can remain the same for all generations. The interpretation given to this law in the 19th century need not be the same in the 21st century also. Judges who interpret the law play a vital role here. They can interpret the law in such a way that it meets the standards of the new century. Precedent is a strong source of law in this regard. Though when compared to the binding nature of statutes, precedents has got only a persuasive nature. The Legislature can always invalidate or overrule such unwritten laws by amending the existing statute or by bringing in a new statute. This gives a high hand to the legislature which is run by people’s representatives. Legislature is thus supreme though Constitution is said to be the one. Constitution is itself a product of the legislature.
Author:RubinJohn
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
The legal systems of both India and the US have both originated from the Common law. No wonder why the basic principles of law are very similar or almost the same. Law gets its existence from various sources like customs, common law, statutes, precedents etc. Austin’s famous definition of law as the command of the sovereign gives an idea about the binding nature of law. As we live in an organized structure of a system called ‘state’ we are bound to follow certain rules and regulations in order for the state to maintain peace and security. Even if it is not mandatory to follow the law of the land, people have a fear of law. Or it is rather self control or self restriction driven by moral principles. Because we live in a society, people generally follow a pattern of behavior that is acceptable by all including the state. There need not be any specific law for that. Law enables the State to handle any situation where individuals start behaving against the acceptable patterns.
Law has become very diverse keeping in pace with the various transactions that people enter in to. Law is keeping abreast of the latest developments in the areas of business, communications and technology. Even if the law has various sources, it has to accept the changes that have occurred in the society and mindset of the people. What good can the law serve if it does not cater to the interests of the people? After all the ultimate purpose of a legal system is administration of justice and justice is for the people. Out of the various sources of law like customs, statutes, precedents etc, there might be certain principles that will not hold good in today’s situation. Most legal systems of the civilized world are designed in such a way as to be amended as and when the society changes in that regard. Precedents as a source of law play a very important role. There are certain basic principles of law that never requires any change. For e.g., the natural law. This can remain the same for all generations. The interpretation given to this law in the 19th century need not be the same in the 21st century also. Judges who interpret the law play a vital role here. They can interpret the law in such a way that it meets the standards of the new century. Precedent is a strong source of law in this regard. Though when compared to the binding nature of statutes, precedents has got only a persuasive nature. The Legislature can always invalidate or overrule such unwritten laws by amending the existing statute or by bringing in a new statute. This gives a high hand to the legislature which is run by people’s representatives. Legislature is thus supreme though Constitution is said to be the one. Constitution is itself a product of the legislature.
Author:RubinJohn
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Courts and Administration of Justice
Both in India and the US, Common law has lost its independent existence. It has got diluted in to their legal systems. Common law has become very much their own. The striking similarity between the US and Indian legal system is their common law origin. Common law has got Americanized and it is now ‘American’ law which includes the Constitution, the statutes, treaties, administrative agency rules, state constitution, state statutes etc. We can also see traces of common law in the Indian Constitution, various Indian statutes. But we cannot separate out common law from Indian law. American legal system is far more advanced than Indian legal system. The Court structure is very systematic in the US though complicated. Two parallel system of Courts run in the US owing to the nature of the political system of the country i.e., federal and state. The hierarchy of courts is well set up but it has its own inadequacies. There is an elaborate system of courts both in US and India but the results produced does not always meet the standards of justice as laid down by the common law. Delay, misinterpretation, maladministration etc haps the delivery of justice.
Author:RubinJohn
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Both in India and the US, Common law has lost its independent existence. It has got diluted in to their legal systems. Common law has become very much their own. The striking similarity between the US and Indian legal system is their common law origin. Common law has got Americanized and it is now ‘American’ law which includes the Constitution, the statutes, treaties, administrative agency rules, state constitution, state statutes etc. We can also see traces of common law in the Indian Constitution, various Indian statutes. But we cannot separate out common law from Indian law. American legal system is far more advanced than Indian legal system. The Court structure is very systematic in the US though complicated. Two parallel system of Courts run in the US owing to the nature of the political system of the country i.e., federal and state. The hierarchy of courts is well set up but it has its own inadequacies. There is an elaborate system of courts both in US and India but the results produced does not always meet the standards of justice as laid down by the common law. Delay, misinterpretation, maladministration etc haps the delivery of justice.
Author:RubinJohn
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
THE ART OF LEGAL WRITING
Writing is an acquired skill. Having good ideas but not being able to effectively put it across to others is a problem that many people face today. With proper training it is possible to get rid of this handicap. Like all skills, writing also requires some formal specialized training. The profession of a lawyer involves a lot of writing but a law student gets little or no formal training in writing while at law school. A student of law may refer to secondary sources like books to write an assignment. However a lawyer usually is required to refer to the primary sources of law for the purpose of his profession. Primary sources can be divided into two. They are case laws [judicial decisions] and enacted law [statutes, constitution and administrative regulations] Gathering of information therefore becomes very important and it becomes necessary that the information should be taken from the right sources.
The first information that needs to be collected is regarding the origin of the primary source of law. The rule is that enacted law prevails over case law and therefore, the search should always begin with the applicable statutes or the constitutional provision. In the absence of any statutory or constitutional provision, case laws take predominance.
The United States is a common law country and in common law countries, the judge made laws form an important part of the legal system. Decisions rendered by the judges, attain the status of law and are binding precedents. Some precedents have greater authoritative value than others. The courts are required to follow only binding precedents. Precedents become binding on a court only when the decision is by that court or a higher court.
The doctrine of Stare decisis constrain a judge to decide a case in accordance with the rules laid down in the previous decision. However in case the judge does not want to follow the same decision, he can repudiate the earlier decision and lay down a new rule different from the one previously adopted. This is usually done when the earlier decision has become outdated, due to changed conditions, when the earlier decision produced undesirable results or was guided by poor reasoning.
Therefore when writing an analysis on a problem, the search should always begin with the relevant statutes and then the relevant case laws interpreting the statutes. The author should always start with the relevant case laws from the highest court and then move on to other relevant decisions from that jurisdiction’s lower courts.
In case the citing of case law appears to be complicated, the citing of statutes is not too simple either. In the first instance, the enacted law has a hierarchy. Under the enacted law, the Constitution comes first, followed by the Federal statutes and treaties and then the State laws. Problems crop up in the matter of interpretation of statutes by courts since there may be ambiguity with regard to the language of the statute, the construction of the sentence etc.
With respect to the case laws also, some decided cases may have more weight age than others depending on the court which decided the matter, the reputation of the judge who decided the issue, the year of the decision etc.
Another important aspect that needs to be mentioned here is the topic of citation to the source. Citation to the source shows the authority from whom that particular sentence was taken. It also helps to avoid plagiarism. In case a sentence or paragraph comes very close to the original, it is better to quote it rather than to cite it.
Therefore in conclusion it can be said that to be a good legal writer, a person is required to have reasonable writing skills and an understanding of the relevant statutes and case laws on the subject. Last but not the least, when writing a topic, care should be taken to make sure that the citations is properly made. With a little guidance and some formal training everybody can master the art of legal writing.
Author:SanjanaNair
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Writing is an acquired skill. Having good ideas but not being able to effectively put it across to others is a problem that many people face today. With proper training it is possible to get rid of this handicap. Like all skills, writing also requires some formal specialized training. The profession of a lawyer involves a lot of writing but a law student gets little or no formal training in writing while at law school. A student of law may refer to secondary sources like books to write an assignment. However a lawyer usually is required to refer to the primary sources of law for the purpose of his profession. Primary sources can be divided into two. They are case laws [judicial decisions] and enacted law [statutes, constitution and administrative regulations] Gathering of information therefore becomes very important and it becomes necessary that the information should be taken from the right sources.
The first information that needs to be collected is regarding the origin of the primary source of law. The rule is that enacted law prevails over case law and therefore, the search should always begin with the applicable statutes or the constitutional provision. In the absence of any statutory or constitutional provision, case laws take predominance.
The United States is a common law country and in common law countries, the judge made laws form an important part of the legal system. Decisions rendered by the judges, attain the status of law and are binding precedents. Some precedents have greater authoritative value than others. The courts are required to follow only binding precedents. Precedents become binding on a court only when the decision is by that court or a higher court.
The doctrine of Stare decisis constrain a judge to decide a case in accordance with the rules laid down in the previous decision. However in case the judge does not want to follow the same decision, he can repudiate the earlier decision and lay down a new rule different from the one previously adopted. This is usually done when the earlier decision has become outdated, due to changed conditions, when the earlier decision produced undesirable results or was guided by poor reasoning.
Therefore when writing an analysis on a problem, the search should always begin with the relevant statutes and then the relevant case laws interpreting the statutes. The author should always start with the relevant case laws from the highest court and then move on to other relevant decisions from that jurisdiction’s lower courts.
In case the citing of case law appears to be complicated, the citing of statutes is not too simple either. In the first instance, the enacted law has a hierarchy. Under the enacted law, the Constitution comes first, followed by the Federal statutes and treaties and then the State laws. Problems crop up in the matter of interpretation of statutes by courts since there may be ambiguity with regard to the language of the statute, the construction of the sentence etc.
With respect to the case laws also, some decided cases may have more weight age than others depending on the court which decided the matter, the reputation of the judge who decided the issue, the year of the decision etc.
Another important aspect that needs to be mentioned here is the topic of citation to the source. Citation to the source shows the authority from whom that particular sentence was taken. It also helps to avoid plagiarism. In case a sentence or paragraph comes very close to the original, it is better to quote it rather than to cite it.
Therefore in conclusion it can be said that to be a good legal writer, a person is required to have reasonable writing skills and an understanding of the relevant statutes and case laws on the subject. Last but not the least, when writing a topic, care should be taken to make sure that the citations is properly made. With a little guidance and some formal training everybody can master the art of legal writing.
Author:SanjanaNair
JuniorAssociate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
THE AMERICAN SYSTEM OF LAW
A prudent person after analyzing and understanding the American Legal System may realize the complexity of American Law. The Constitutional Law is often contradictory. There is a debate over the topic Separation of Powers and the concept of federalism. The evolution of American law, like the Indian law is from the English Common law. Though the English Common Law was adopted in entirety American law went through drastic changes over the years. Case laws, customs, logic, precedents, local laws and rules, everything played an important role in shaping the American Constitution. When European settlers came to America they brought the French, Spanish and the Dutch laws. Eventually the framers of the Constitution framed it with the objective of providing fair and natural justice to all. The Constitution says about the wide powers of the State but often restricts the State’s power by making the federal supreme. For example, the United States Supreme Court has no power to decide on any issue of the State and so the State Constitutional rulings are immune from the reversal of the United States Supreme Court unless any federal subject is in dispute. The Commercial Clause of the Constitution grants the federal supremacy over the state law. The Legislature is vested with the power to abolish or modify the Common Law.
If we consider the hierarchy of law, starting from the highest to the lowest, federal constitution tops the hierarchy and the state common law is at the bottom. About the trial system we can say that there are three different stages in a trial: pre-trial, trial and post-trial stage. Trial courts have a single judge only. They conduct trial with or without jury depending on the type of the case and the choice of the parties. The judge has the power to punish for contempt of court. The trial court hears all the evidences and arguments presented by the parties. They determine the facts of the case and the application of the correct law to the facts. The facts cannot be changed or new facts cannot be presented on appeal. Pre-trial motions are conducted before the judge without the assistance of the jury. There are two appellate courts: the Intermediate Appellate Court and the Supreme Court. The judges of the Supreme Court are called Justices. The Intermediate Appellate Court may consist of 3 judges and the Supreme Court may have 5, 7-9 judges. In most of the cases right of appeal is granted only if discrepancies are obvious. The scope of appeal under the American legal system is much narrower.
Generally, when a pre-existing rule is in dispute, the constitution is subject to amendment and moreover the framers could not foresee of such a dispute. But still to the Americans, they hold their Constitution the Supreme Law of the land.
Author:Nesirin Vinod
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi
A prudent person after analyzing and understanding the American Legal System may realize the complexity of American Law. The Constitutional Law is often contradictory. There is a debate over the topic Separation of Powers and the concept of federalism. The evolution of American law, like the Indian law is from the English Common law. Though the English Common Law was adopted in entirety American law went through drastic changes over the years. Case laws, customs, logic, precedents, local laws and rules, everything played an important role in shaping the American Constitution. When European settlers came to America they brought the French, Spanish and the Dutch laws. Eventually the framers of the Constitution framed it with the objective of providing fair and natural justice to all. The Constitution says about the wide powers of the State but often restricts the State’s power by making the federal supreme. For example, the United States Supreme Court has no power to decide on any issue of the State and so the State Constitutional rulings are immune from the reversal of the United States Supreme Court unless any federal subject is in dispute. The Commercial Clause of the Constitution grants the federal supremacy over the state law. The Legislature is vested with the power to abolish or modify the Common Law.
If we consider the hierarchy of law, starting from the highest to the lowest, federal constitution tops the hierarchy and the state common law is at the bottom. About the trial system we can say that there are three different stages in a trial: pre-trial, trial and post-trial stage. Trial courts have a single judge only. They conduct trial with or without jury depending on the type of the case and the choice of the parties. The judge has the power to punish for contempt of court. The trial court hears all the evidences and arguments presented by the parties. They determine the facts of the case and the application of the correct law to the facts. The facts cannot be changed or new facts cannot be presented on appeal. Pre-trial motions are conducted before the judge without the assistance of the jury. There are two appellate courts: the Intermediate Appellate Court and the Supreme Court. The judges of the Supreme Court are called Justices. The Intermediate Appellate Court may consist of 3 judges and the Supreme Court may have 5, 7-9 judges. In most of the cases right of appeal is granted only if discrepancies are obvious. The scope of appeal under the American legal system is much narrower.
Generally, when a pre-existing rule is in dispute, the constitution is subject to amendment and moreover the framers could not foresee of such a dispute. But still to the Americans, they hold their Constitution the Supreme Law of the land.
Author:Nesirin Vinod
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi
Writing on legal authority on basis of primary sources
To be a good legal writer, the essential factors are the skills to write well and the basic understanding of law and how to interpret it. To basically do a good job one must be able to read quite a bit and have a very analytical mind. We have to do a lot of research to collect the necessary information which forms the basis for good writing. The essential factor is the primary sources. Primary sources can be broadly classified into: two.
• Case laws consisting of judicial decisions
• Enacted laws. Which includes constitution, statutes and administrative laws.
Analyzing a given problem will be an amalgamation of 1, the enacted laws that regulates the subject matter of that particular problem and 2. the decisions of cases involving similar situations and issues.
When we do a research of a particular problem we have to keep in mind first the enacted laws relevant to the given situation, but we also have to see the scope of similar relevant cases handled earlier and take an account of the decisions taken therein. If at all a particular statute or constitutional law is not given, then we have to rely on. earlier cases to provide the law on the subject.
Talking about how law works in the United States,
The system of law of United States is very similar to the law of England in that both follow the law of precedence. Both follow the common law principle. Common law is Judge- made law. What it means is that rule of law comes from the written decisions of judges who hear and decide litigations. When a case is decided by a judge it attains the status of law and becomes a precedent for future similar controversial cases. That means it has twin role. The decision resolves the litigation that is before the court and if the decision is published it becomes available for use by judge in later litigations. Since we are familiar with the structure of the court system of the United States Of America, I would like to stress upon the development of the law through the common law process.
Position of a court within the structure determines how decisions are taken as precedent. Some courts have greater value than the others. Another term we come across similar to Precedent is Stare decisis. It is the shortened form of a phrase in Latin which means “to stand by precedent and not to disturb settled points” What it means in simple words is that the court has to follow those precedents that are binding authority. The precedent becomes “the binding Authority” if the cases were decided by that court or an even higher court in the same jurisdiction.
United States have many jurisdictions so it is necessary to determine which precedents a court in each jurisdiction must follow besides its prior decision.
State Law:In the matter of state laws the state court must follow precedents from the higher court.If the trial court consists of different intermediate appellate court then it must follow precedence of the intermediate courts also.State courts are bound by the statute of that state as interpreted by the court. It is not necessary that the interpretation of the statute of one state be binding for another state.
Federal Law:The decisions of the supreme court of the United States is binding for all the courts in all jurisdictions for matters of constitutional and federal laws. For matters of Federal law court of appeals are bound by its own decisions and of the Supreme Court.The District court is not bound by the decisions of any other District court nor by decisions of any other federal court of appeal.
So in a nut shell since the common law and statutes are binding for all future litigations when we write on legal authority we should
• Identify the binding laws on the issue or problem.
• We should note the relevant statutes involved .
• Identify cases that interprets the statues.
Author:Susan Alex
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
To be a good legal writer, the essential factors are the skills to write well and the basic understanding of law and how to interpret it. To basically do a good job one must be able to read quite a bit and have a very analytical mind. We have to do a lot of research to collect the necessary information which forms the basis for good writing. The essential factor is the primary sources. Primary sources can be broadly classified into: two.
• Case laws consisting of judicial decisions
• Enacted laws. Which includes constitution, statutes and administrative laws.
Analyzing a given problem will be an amalgamation of 1, the enacted laws that regulates the subject matter of that particular problem and 2. the decisions of cases involving similar situations and issues.
When we do a research of a particular problem we have to keep in mind first the enacted laws relevant to the given situation, but we also have to see the scope of similar relevant cases handled earlier and take an account of the decisions taken therein. If at all a particular statute or constitutional law is not given, then we have to rely on. earlier cases to provide the law on the subject.
Talking about how law works in the United States,
The system of law of United States is very similar to the law of England in that both follow the law of precedence. Both follow the common law principle. Common law is Judge- made law. What it means is that rule of law comes from the written decisions of judges who hear and decide litigations. When a case is decided by a judge it attains the status of law and becomes a precedent for future similar controversial cases. That means it has twin role. The decision resolves the litigation that is before the court and if the decision is published it becomes available for use by judge in later litigations. Since we are familiar with the structure of the court system of the United States Of America, I would like to stress upon the development of the law through the common law process.
Position of a court within the structure determines how decisions are taken as precedent. Some courts have greater value than the others. Another term we come across similar to Precedent is Stare decisis. It is the shortened form of a phrase in Latin which means “to stand by precedent and not to disturb settled points” What it means in simple words is that the court has to follow those precedents that are binding authority. The precedent becomes “the binding Authority” if the cases were decided by that court or an even higher court in the same jurisdiction.
United States have many jurisdictions so it is necessary to determine which precedents a court in each jurisdiction must follow besides its prior decision.
State Law:In the matter of state laws the state court must follow precedents from the higher court.If the trial court consists of different intermediate appellate court then it must follow precedence of the intermediate courts also.State courts are bound by the statute of that state as interpreted by the court. It is not necessary that the interpretation of the statute of one state be binding for another state.
Federal Law:The decisions of the supreme court of the United States is binding for all the courts in all jurisdictions for matters of constitutional and federal laws. For matters of Federal law court of appeals are bound by its own decisions and of the Supreme Court.The District court is not bound by the decisions of any other District court nor by decisions of any other federal court of appeal.
So in a nut shell since the common law and statutes are binding for all future litigations when we write on legal authority we should
• Identify the binding laws on the issue or problem.
• We should note the relevant statutes involved .
• Identify cases that interprets the statues.
Author:Susan Alex
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Common Law Process and its Development
In United States, law is developed through litigations conducted in courts. Each state has its own jurisdiction and hierarchy of courts. The court system is organized along a vertical structure. The position of a court in this vertical structure determines the way its decisions are treated as precedents.
The system of Precedents has a companion doctrine called stare decisis which is a shortened form of the phrase Stare decisis et non quieta movere. The phrase means that the courts should follow the precedents by not disturbing the settled points. Therefore, the courts should follow only the precedents which have a binding authority on them.
Precedents can be either binding or persuasive according to the positions of the courts in the hierarchy within the specific jurisdiction. If there are precedents from a higher court of the same state jurisdiction on a particular point of law, then the judges of the lower court are constrained to decide a pending case according to the earlier decisions. Such a precedent is a binding authority on the lower courts in the vertical structure of court system. If there are some decisions from a higher court of a state, the judge of a lower court in another state is not bound to decide a pending case according to that decision. Precedents from another state jurisdiction have only persuasive authority. The Judge may take these decisions into account, but it is not necessary to follow them.
When we search for case authorities, we should search for binding authorities. If the case is a first impression case, we should look for how the courts in other jurisdictions have treated similar cases, so that those precedents will persuade the court to decide the case.
Except for state law issues, United States Supreme Court is the Appellate authority for all the courts in the United States of America. United States Supreme Court is the only court which is specifically created by the constitution. The composition and jurisdiction of the court are decided by Congress. It consists of 9 Judges including 8 Associate Justices and the Chief justice of The United States of America. The Court hears all the cases en banc, which means that all the 9 justices sit and make final decisions in all cases. A decision can be reviewed by the Supreme Court, either as a matter of right or through a writ of certiorari. The term certiorari means ‘bring up the record’. The Supreme Court maintains the supremacy and consistency of Federal Law by the exercise of appellate certiorari jurisdiction over the cases involving federal issues from lower federal courts and the highest courts of the states.
Author:Neethu Alex
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
In United States, law is developed through litigations conducted in courts. Each state has its own jurisdiction and hierarchy of courts. The court system is organized along a vertical structure. The position of a court in this vertical structure determines the way its decisions are treated as precedents.
The system of Precedents has a companion doctrine called stare decisis which is a shortened form of the phrase Stare decisis et non quieta movere. The phrase means that the courts should follow the precedents by not disturbing the settled points. Therefore, the courts should follow only the precedents which have a binding authority on them.
Precedents can be either binding or persuasive according to the positions of the courts in the hierarchy within the specific jurisdiction. If there are precedents from a higher court of the same state jurisdiction on a particular point of law, then the judges of the lower court are constrained to decide a pending case according to the earlier decisions. Such a precedent is a binding authority on the lower courts in the vertical structure of court system. If there are some decisions from a higher court of a state, the judge of a lower court in another state is not bound to decide a pending case according to that decision. Precedents from another state jurisdiction have only persuasive authority. The Judge may take these decisions into account, but it is not necessary to follow them.
When we search for case authorities, we should search for binding authorities. If the case is a first impression case, we should look for how the courts in other jurisdictions have treated similar cases, so that those precedents will persuade the court to decide the case.
Except for state law issues, United States Supreme Court is the Appellate authority for all the courts in the United States of America. United States Supreme Court is the only court which is specifically created by the constitution. The composition and jurisdiction of the court are decided by Congress. It consists of 9 Judges including 8 Associate Justices and the Chief justice of The United States of America. The Court hears all the cases en banc, which means that all the 9 justices sit and make final decisions in all cases. A decision can be reviewed by the Supreme Court, either as a matter of right or through a writ of certiorari. The term certiorari means ‘bring up the record’. The Supreme Court maintains the supremacy and consistency of Federal Law by the exercise of appellate certiorari jurisdiction over the cases involving federal issues from lower federal courts and the highest courts of the states.
Author:Neethu Alex
Junior Associate
LegalEase Solutions Pvt Ltd
Kochi.
Friday, March 14, 2008
LegalEase,Kochi celebrates Tariq Akbar's b'day...
From your old friend's and new...............,
Happy B'day to you........................!!!!!!!!!!!!
,+anurama,+seema,+pooja+and+jovy.jpg)
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Guest Post: Offshoring of Legal Research and Writing
As mentioned in the earlier post welcoming 2008, this is the first guest post in the
series. The author of this post is Tariq Hafeez, the President of and General Counsel for LegalEase Solutions LLC.
Introduction
As legal process outsourcing (LPO) continues to expand in market share, so too will the number of service offerings from LPOs. Law, much like medicine, is a profession ripe with specialties and specialists. The various types of legal support services that can be offshored are as varied and diverse as the legal market itself. In today’s nascent LPO market, most LPO providers offer a wide array of legal support services—a one stop shop for legal outsourcing. As the LPO industry continues to develop and mature, LPOs will differentiate themselves not only by size and capabilities, but also by what area of law they are best suited to outsource.
Legal research and writing (LR&R) services encompass both drafting research memoranda as well as drafting legal pleadings of all varieties—trial motions, briefs in support, appellate briefs, writs, etc.
Read full article in
www.businessweek.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.businessweek.com and
LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
As mentioned in the earlier post welcoming 2008, this is the first guest post in the
series. The author of this post is Tariq Hafeez, the President of and General Counsel for LegalEase Solutions LLC.
Introduction
As legal process outsourcing (LPO) continues to expand in market share, so too will the number of service offerings from LPOs. Law, much like medicine, is a profession ripe with specialties and specialists. The various types of legal support services that can be offshored are as varied and diverse as the legal market itself. In today’s nascent LPO market, most LPO providers offer a wide array of legal support services—a one stop shop for legal outsourcing. As the LPO industry continues to develop and mature, LPOs will differentiate themselves not only by size and capabilities, but also by what area of law they are best suited to outsource.
Legal research and writing (LR&R) services encompass both drafting research memoranda as well as drafting legal pleadings of all varieties—trial motions, briefs in support, appellate briefs, writs, etc.
Read full article in
www.businessweek.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.businessweek.com and
LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Friday, October 05, 2007
LEGALEASE WINS MENTION IN BUSINESSWEEK
ARTICLE ON OUTSOURCING
Employing 25 people who serve over 50 clients from the US, UK and Canada, LegaEase has built an impressive repertoire of legal services that are made available to law-firms, big and small, legal departments and legal counsel, quickly, with efficiency and affordably.
According to NASSCOM, there is a huge potential in this estimated US$ 250 billion legal services market. Resisting the temptation of taking on high volume low-end back office legal work that would guarantee faster growth in terms of company size and revenues, they have developed an expertise in high-end sophisticated research. Says Tariq Akbar, “We don’t want to build a big company, we want to build a great company.”
It is probably this drive to excel in the field that has earned the company a favorable reputation in legal circles that led to it being the only legal outsourcing company to be mentioned in an article on outsourcing in a leading business magazine, BusinessWeek.
The service lessens the need for LegalEase clients to hire associates to do legal grunt work. The past year has also witnessed LegalEase entering a partnership with Legalbill.com LLC a major legal services provider who specializes in legal spend management, analysis and auditing serving North America, Western Europe and Asia. This Legalbill/LegalEase partnership offers corporate law departments and law firms a full suite of services ranging from legal cost analysis, auditing, and identification of areas of critical legal spend to offshoring solutions tailored to the same.
Legalbill services companies by analyzing exactly how much they are spending on legal costs and which areas of legal work this money is being spent on. The partnership has created a one-stop shop for legal spend management directed at making things more cost-effective.
If market forecasts and media hype are anything to go by, then the legal offshoring market makes for very exciting study. The inroads outsourcing has made into the fairly traditional and conservative legal circles have proved beyond doubt that its economic viability has forced lawyers and legal department to consider it as an alternative.
-
Shazia Akbar
Staff Writer, LegalEase Solutions LLC
Employing 25 people who serve over 50 clients from the US, UK and Canada, LegaEase has built an impressive repertoire of legal services that are made available to law-firms, big and small, legal departments and legal counsel, quickly, with efficiency and affordably.
According to NASSCOM, there is a huge potential in this estimated US$ 250 billion legal services market. Resisting the temptation of taking on high volume low-end back office legal work that would guarantee faster growth in terms of company size and revenues, they have developed an expertise in high-end sophisticated research. Says Tariq Akbar, “We don’t want to build a big company, we want to build a great company.”
It is probably this drive to excel in the field that has earned the company a favorable reputation in legal circles that led to it being the only legal outsourcing company to be mentioned in an article on outsourcing in a leading business magazine, BusinessWeek.
Law is another developing hot spot for offshoring. While large law firms have been slow to shift work to India, corporations and smaller firms are taking the plunge. LegalEase Solutions, a Detroit outsourcing business with 50 clients in the U.S., shows how it's done. The firm's 20 Indian lawyers handle everything from researching legal precedents to writing drafts of briefs.
The service lessens the need for LegalEase clients to hire associates to do legal grunt work. The past year has also witnessed LegalEase entering a partnership with Legalbill.com LLC a major legal services provider who specializes in legal spend management, analysis and auditing serving North America, Western Europe and Asia. This Legalbill/LegalEase partnership offers corporate law departments and law firms a full suite of services ranging from legal cost analysis, auditing, and identification of areas of critical legal spend to offshoring solutions tailored to the same.
Legalbill services companies by analyzing exactly how much they are spending on legal costs and which areas of legal work this money is being spent on. The partnership has created a one-stop shop for legal spend management directed at making things more cost-effective.
If market forecasts and media hype are anything to go by, then the legal offshoring market makes for very exciting study. The inroads outsourcing has made into the fairly traditional and conservative legal circles have proved beyond doubt that its economic viability has forced lawyers and legal department to consider it as an alternative.
-
Shazia Akbar
Staff Writer, LegalEase Solutions LLC
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
How To Keep Your Job Onshore
An ever-wider variety of white-collar jobs is being sent offshore. Here's how to make sure yours isn't one of them
How do you keep from being Bangalored? Or Shanghaied? That's the question Valparaiso University freshman Matt Cavin asked himself two years ago when he was in China on a summer study program. Young Chinese were intently studying English, science, and math. One day, when he was sitting by a lake reading Thomas L. Friedman's The World is Flat, a Chinese student approached, wanting to practice his English. As they talked, Cavin mulled Friedman's message about U.S. jobs moving to low-cost countries such as India and China, and he had an epiphany: "I started thinking about what it means to be in active competition with kids overseas. I realized I had to set myself apart."
When he returned to the U.S., Cavin mapped out an ambitious self-improvement program. Gone was his theology major. In its place, when he graduates next spring, he'll have no fewer than three bachelor's degrees: international business, economics, and Mandarin. Cavin, 21, sees plenty of opportunities. He isn't running scared. But he's running.
Read full article in www.businessweek.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.businessweek.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
How do you keep from being Bangalored? Or Shanghaied? That's the question Valparaiso University freshman Matt Cavin asked himself two years ago when he was in China on a summer study program. Young Chinese were intently studying English, science, and math. One day, when he was sitting by a lake reading Thomas L. Friedman's The World is Flat, a Chinese student approached, wanting to practice his English. As they talked, Cavin mulled Friedman's message about U.S. jobs moving to low-cost countries such as India and China, and he had an epiphany: "I started thinking about what it means to be in active competition with kids overseas. I realized I had to set myself apart."
When he returned to the U.S., Cavin mapped out an ambitious self-improvement program. Gone was his theology major. In its place, when he graduates next spring, he'll have no fewer than three bachelor's degrees: international business, economics, and Mandarin. Cavin, 21, sees plenty of opportunities. He isn't running scared. But he's running.
Read full article in www.businessweek.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.businessweek.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Friday, August 10, 2007
Ethics Opinions Allow Foreign Legal Outsourcing
Lawyers and clients must weigh cost savings, quality, duty to supervise
Bar committees in New York City, San Diego County, and Los Angeles County have ruled, expressly or implicitly, that lawyers may contract with foreign lawyers not admitted to practice in any jurisdiction in the United States, or with nonlawyers outside the United States, to perform legal work for U.S. clients. These authorities hold that foreign legal outsourcing does not constitute aiding the unauthorized practice of law. NYCBA Formal Op. 2006-3; SDCBA Formal Legal Ethics Op. 2007-1; LACBA Ethics Op. 518.
The New York City bar opinion notes that outsourcing overseas “has begun to command attention in the legal profession, as corporate legal departments and law firms endeavor to reduce costs and manage operations more efficiently.” Some market research firms project that tens of thousands of U.S. legal jobs soon will be outsourced to low-cost countries, with the majority of jobs going to India.
Read full article in American Bar Association
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.abanet.org and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Bar committees in New York City, San Diego County, and Los Angeles County have ruled, expressly or implicitly, that lawyers may contract with foreign lawyers not admitted to practice in any jurisdiction in the United States, or with nonlawyers outside the United States, to perform legal work for U.S. clients. These authorities hold that foreign legal outsourcing does not constitute aiding the unauthorized practice of law. NYCBA Formal Op. 2006-3; SDCBA Formal Legal Ethics Op. 2007-1; LACBA Ethics Op. 518.
Outsourcing ‘will expand exponentially because of discovery costs.’
The New York City bar opinion notes that outsourcing overseas “has begun to command attention in the legal profession, as corporate legal departments and law firms endeavor to reduce costs and manage operations more efficiently.” Some market research firms project that tens of thousands of U.S. legal jobs soon will be outsourced to low-cost countries, with the majority of jobs going to India.
Read full article in American Bar Association
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.abanet.org and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Thursday, July 05, 2007
ValueNotes releases 'Offshoring Legal Services to India'
(openPR) - The Indian legal services outsourcing space has changed remarkably over the last two years. Newer services have been added to the offshored list, many new vendors have emerged and several existing vendors have developed greater capabilities.
There is no doubt that the established brand value of India in the global BPO space has been a growth propeller for the legal services outsourcing industry. A recently released report by ValueNotes estimates that the current Indian revenues from legal services offshoring are slated to grow from $146 million for the calendar year 2006 to reach $640 million by end 2010. The industry employed around 7,500 people in the legal offshoring space in India as of end 2006. The Legal services outsourcing industry has grown at 50% CARG through 2005-06. This growth has been achieved primarily due to increasing demand, vendor maturity and capability of vendors to offer higher value services.
Read full article in www.openpr.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.openpr.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
There is no doubt that the established brand value of India in the global BPO space has been a growth propeller for the legal services outsourcing industry. A recently released report by ValueNotes estimates that the current Indian revenues from legal services offshoring are slated to grow from $146 million for the calendar year 2006 to reach $640 million by end 2010. The industry employed around 7,500 people in the legal offshoring space in India as of end 2006. The Legal services outsourcing industry has grown at 50% CARG through 2005-06. This growth has been achieved primarily due to increasing demand, vendor maturity and capability of vendors to offer higher value services.
Read full article in www.openpr.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.openpr.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
The next level - legal outsourcing
Technology has shrunk the world to a global village; outsourcing is now the buzzword that is changing the job markets globally. Voice is the first level of offshoring, which is now moved up to knowledge-based jobs.
Since outsourcing has significant savings for companies, this concept is gaining favour across a spectrum of industries.
Certainly, as mounting legal costs create a cause for concern, outsourcing litigation support activity is being seen as a viable option, especially since firms can get their work done for one third of the cost incurred on their home turf.
Read full article in jamaica-gleaner.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from jamaica-gleaner.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Since outsourcing has significant savings for companies, this concept is gaining favour across a spectrum of industries.
Certainly, as mounting legal costs create a cause for concern, outsourcing litigation support activity is being seen as a viable option, especially since firms can get their work done for one third of the cost incurred on their home turf.
Read full article in jamaica-gleaner.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from jamaica-gleaner.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Businessworld piece on LPO
A decade after legal work began to be outsourced to India, the industry has grown to reach an annual turnover of $60 million(Rs 246 crore). But despite the hype over how legal outsourcing and other such value-added services would alter the global economy by moving high value, white collar jobs out of western economies and into India, the fact is that this is not happening.
$60 million sounds like a reasonable estimate. I don't think the day will ever come when even theoretically every Western lawyer will be replacable by an Indian lawyer. In India, law doesn't seem to be a career of choice for many and it doesn't seem things will change vastly anytime soon. This, of course, affects how many of legal graduates being churned out by law schools across India are suitably deployed for doing offshored legal work.
Read full article in legallyours.blogspot.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from legallyours.blogspot.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
$60 million sounds like a reasonable estimate. I don't think the day will ever come when even theoretically every Western lawyer will be replacable by an Indian lawyer. In India, law doesn't seem to be a career of choice for many and it doesn't seem things will change vastly anytime soon. This, of course, affects how many of legal graduates being churned out by law schools across India are suitably deployed for doing offshored legal work.
Read full article in legallyours.blogspot.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from legallyours.blogspot.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Now, For Some LPO Action
Now, for some LPO action
SACHIN MALHAN
Career prospects are tremendous in the Legal Process Outsourcing industry
The argument that off-shoring, as a practice, can create tremendous employment opportunities is now largely uncontested. It has been validated time and time again, and India is a shining example, arguably the best example.
The Indian BPO industry, which currently employs 6.5 million people, has become the stuff of stories and legends. People have made their careers not just in the industry but even ‘on’ the industry, through bestsellers and big-screen blockbusters!
The benefits of off-shoring have been felt in numerous industry verticals, including health care, research, media and, more recently, the legal industry. The significance of ‘off-shoring’ in the Indian economy is continuously increasing, and many believe that these are the ‘early days’ of offshoring, not just in terms of volume of work but also in terms of variety.
For the legal industry this is a period of tremendous learning and development, and the shape that Legal Process Outsourcing has taken raises incredible possibilities for legal professionals and industry alike.
The Indian higher education machine, and it’s a big one, turns out close to 80,000 law graduates every year.
Of this lot, only a handful, mostly from the top 12-15 law schools (a number not exceeding five per cent of the total graduates), join the law firms and legal departments, or apprentice under good counsel (senior lawyers) at the various courts and tribunals.
A sizeable percentage of the rest pursue other options including the civil services while the remaining majority struggle to succeed in the courts. Diverse work
LPO opportunities can transform that five per cent to something closer to 40 per cent, by drawing law graduates into work that’s not just large in volume but tremendously diverse.
Rising legal costs in the U.S., and more recently in the EU, are amongst a variety of other factors that are driving a diverse portfolio of legal work to India. There is now offshoring work at almost every level of expertise and this is what makes the curry very spicy and appealing to a wide range of legal professionals.
For a young legal professional, a career with an LPO is attractive for several reasons: it is a sunrise industry which should see a boom in the next 3-5 years; there is a tremendous variety of work at all levels of expertise; high-end opportunities for graduates of top law schools; attractive remuneration and future management prospects; an opportunity to work in a corporate structure that straddles borders; a learning opportunity for those considering legal and paralegal careers in the U.K. or the U.S.
Forrester Research estimates that there could be a demand for as many as 79,000 LPO professionals in the next 7-8 years.
According to Russell Smith of SDD Global Solutions, the offshoring arm of a leading U.S. law firm, the figure is based on an assumption that only 10 per cent of law firm work can be outsourced while with an increase in global confidence in Indian legal services that percentage could be much larger.
Already 155 of the top 200 U.S. law firms outsource some portion of their work.
Some critics have remarked that most of the work will be high volume but low value.
But several leading LPOs including Quislex, Jurimatrix and Bodhi Global have created business models leveraging high-volume high-value opportunities which they strongly believe are out there for everyone to see. Research, Transaction Support, Case Analysis are good examples of high-value work that’s also coming across in large volumes. Skills
So what does one have to do to be, and excel as, an LPO professional. Currently, 77 per cent of all LPO work emanates from the U.S. Therefore proficiency in American English, drafting and research methodology are essential skills. Comfort with work place technology is another important pre-requisite as all product creation and delivery is done using computer applications.
Only a tiny percentage of graduating lawyers are equipped with all the skills needed for the LPO industry. Capacity building and re-orientation to U.S. legal systems and methodologies will be the key in ensuring success.
Interestingly there is a healthy chunk of work that can be done, or in some cases required to be done, by non-lawyers. For instance, there is a tremendous demand for engineers in the intellectual property work space.
The work involves analysing scientific and technological inventions for the purposes of crafting legal protection for the same. This work needs to be done by those with technological skills and hence the opportunities.
One message that’s writ large – professionals who enter the industry now, at this strategic phase, will be best positioned to benefit when it booms in the months to come.
SACHIN MALHAN
Career prospects are tremendous in the Legal Process Outsourcing industry
The argument that off-shoring, as a practice, can create tremendous employment opportunities is now largely uncontested. It has been validated time and time again, and India is a shining example, arguably the best example.
The Indian BPO industry, which currently employs 6.5 million people, has become the stuff of stories and legends. People have made their careers not just in the industry but even ‘on’ the industry, through bestsellers and big-screen blockbusters!
The benefits of off-shoring have been felt in numerous industry verticals, including health care, research, media and, more recently, the legal industry. The significance of ‘off-shoring’ in the Indian economy is continuously increasing, and many believe that these are the ‘early days’ of offshoring, not just in terms of volume of work but also in terms of variety.
For the legal industry this is a period of tremendous learning and development, and the shape that Legal Process Outsourcing has taken raises incredible possibilities for legal professionals and industry alike.
The Indian higher education machine, and it’s a big one, turns out close to 80,000 law graduates every year.
Of this lot, only a handful, mostly from the top 12-15 law schools (a number not exceeding five per cent of the total graduates), join the law firms and legal departments, or apprentice under good counsel (senior lawyers) at the various courts and tribunals.
A sizeable percentage of the rest pursue other options including the civil services while the remaining majority struggle to succeed in the courts. Diverse work
LPO opportunities can transform that five per cent to something closer to 40 per cent, by drawing law graduates into work that’s not just large in volume but tremendously diverse.
Rising legal costs in the U.S., and more recently in the EU, are amongst a variety of other factors that are driving a diverse portfolio of legal work to India. There is now offshoring work at almost every level of expertise and this is what makes the curry very spicy and appealing to a wide range of legal professionals.
For a young legal professional, a career with an LPO is attractive for several reasons: it is a sunrise industry which should see a boom in the next 3-5 years; there is a tremendous variety of work at all levels of expertise; high-end opportunities for graduates of top law schools; attractive remuneration and future management prospects; an opportunity to work in a corporate structure that straddles borders; a learning opportunity for those considering legal and paralegal careers in the U.K. or the U.S.
Forrester Research estimates that there could be a demand for as many as 79,000 LPO professionals in the next 7-8 years.
According to Russell Smith of SDD Global Solutions, the offshoring arm of a leading U.S. law firm, the figure is based on an assumption that only 10 per cent of law firm work can be outsourced while with an increase in global confidence in Indian legal services that percentage could be much larger.
Already 155 of the top 200 U.S. law firms outsource some portion of their work.
Some critics have remarked that most of the work will be high volume but low value.
But several leading LPOs including Quislex, Jurimatrix and Bodhi Global have created business models leveraging high-volume high-value opportunities which they strongly believe are out there for everyone to see. Research, Transaction Support, Case Analysis are good examples of high-value work that’s also coming across in large volumes. Skills
So what does one have to do to be, and excel as, an LPO professional. Currently, 77 per cent of all LPO work emanates from the U.S. Therefore proficiency in American English, drafting and research methodology are essential skills. Comfort with work place technology is another important pre-requisite as all product creation and delivery is done using computer applications.
Only a tiny percentage of graduating lawyers are equipped with all the skills needed for the LPO industry. Capacity building and re-orientation to U.S. legal systems and methodologies will be the key in ensuring success.
Interestingly there is a healthy chunk of work that can be done, or in some cases required to be done, by non-lawyers. For instance, there is a tremendous demand for engineers in the intellectual property work space.
The work involves analysing scientific and technological inventions for the purposes of crafting legal protection for the same. This work needs to be done by those with technological skills and hence the opportunities.
One message that’s writ large – professionals who enter the industry now, at this strategic phase, will be best positioned to benefit when it booms in the months to come.
Monday, July 02, 2007
US norms won't hit legal outsourcing
The ethical guidelines proposed by three US bar associations for their attorneys will not have any adverse impact on the legal outsourcing services industry in India.
In fact, the opinions delivered by the associations legitimise the outsourcing of legal services to other countries and will lead to the market in India getting larger, according to Ram Vasudevan, president of SQ Global Solutions.
New York-based SQ Global Solutions is a joint venture between Strategic Legal Solutions, a 12-year-old US domestic legal staffing company and Quislex, a provider of offshore legal services in India. The company employs around 300 professionals, of which about 150 work out of India.
It may be recalled that three US bar associations -- New York, California and Los Angeles -- had in 2006 and early 2007 delivered opinions stating that offshoring of legal support work by lawyers in the US to other countries was ethical provided certain conditions are met.
"The guidelines state that US lawyers who are contemplating outsourcing legal services to other countries should inform their client that the work is being outsourced, besides protecting the client's confidences. The US law firm should also be closely involved in the supervision of the outsourced work. In addition, the entity performing the work must perform conflict checks to avoid any unpleasant surprises," said Vasudevan.
"Companies in India directly deal with the legal departments of US corporations and law firms for outsourcing work to avoid any issues of unauthorised practice and usually have several quality control metrics in place," he said. For instance, SQ follows the Six Sigma process.
At present, there are around 15 companies in India that provide legal outsourcing services, with the prominent among them being SQ Global Solutions, Pangea and Mindcrest.
Though not mandatory, many US law firms and attorneys have been adopting the ethical guidelines and client demand too has been picking up.
This is expected to accelerate the growth of the legal outsourcing services industry in India in the years to come. The Indian legal outsourcing industry is currently pegged at $130 million, and is expected to touch the $4-billion mark by 2015, according to Forrester Research, he added.
Currently, there are around 1,000 such professionals, both lawyers and non-lawyers, delivering high-end legal outsourcing services in India.
- K Rajani Kanth in Hyderabad
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://inhome.rediff.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
In fact, the opinions delivered by the associations legitimise the outsourcing of legal services to other countries and will lead to the market in India getting larger, according to Ram Vasudevan, president of SQ Global Solutions.
New York-based SQ Global Solutions is a joint venture between Strategic Legal Solutions, a 12-year-old US domestic legal staffing company and Quislex, a provider of offshore legal services in India. The company employs around 300 professionals, of which about 150 work out of India.
It may be recalled that three US bar associations -- New York, California and Los Angeles -- had in 2006 and early 2007 delivered opinions stating that offshoring of legal support work by lawyers in the US to other countries was ethical provided certain conditions are met.
"The guidelines state that US lawyers who are contemplating outsourcing legal services to other countries should inform their client that the work is being outsourced, besides protecting the client's confidences. The US law firm should also be closely involved in the supervision of the outsourced work. In addition, the entity performing the work must perform conflict checks to avoid any unpleasant surprises," said Vasudevan.
"Companies in India directly deal with the legal departments of US corporations and law firms for outsourcing work to avoid any issues of unauthorised practice and usually have several quality control metrics in place," he said. For instance, SQ follows the Six Sigma process.
At present, there are around 15 companies in India that provide legal outsourcing services, with the prominent among them being SQ Global Solutions, Pangea and Mindcrest.
Though not mandatory, many US law firms and attorneys have been adopting the ethical guidelines and client demand too has been picking up.
This is expected to accelerate the growth of the legal outsourcing services industry in India in the years to come. The Indian legal outsourcing industry is currently pegged at $130 million, and is expected to touch the $4-billion mark by 2015, according to Forrester Research, he added.
Currently, there are around 1,000 such professionals, both lawyers and non-lawyers, delivering high-end legal outsourcing services in India.
- K Rajani Kanth in Hyderabad
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://inhome.rediff.com and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
What You Should Look in a LPO/KPO/BPO Provider
Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Services are gaining attention of many traditional as well as non-traditional “Legal Outsourcing Service Providers” (LOSPs). Being on the forefront of providing Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Services, India is witnessing growing number of Companies and Firms entering into this unexplored arena. The same may be tolerable and acceptable when it comes to Legal BPO in India as non-traditional and non-legal Companies and Firms can manage them to some extent. But when it comes to “Specialised”, “Expert”, and “Domain Specific Legal Services” these Companies and Firms cannot provide these services effectively by merely hiring few law students as their workforce. Thus, the Persons, Firms, Companies etc that “assign” various outsourced services must be wary about these Companies and Firms which may be “Financially Sound” but “Knowledgably Bankrupt”. In this work Perry4Law is providing its insight and recommendations to various “Legal Outsourcing Services Seekers” so that they can choose the most “Appropriate” and “Expert” LOSPs in India. These suggestions and recommendations are the mirror image of the “Practice Followed” and “Expertise Possessed” by Perry4Law.
India is a favourite destination for various outsourcing related matters. The same is going to increase further in future. These outsourcing services also require a dedicated and legal framework complaint service providing base. It includes a compliance with the Cyber Law of India, adherence to the protection and enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in India (IPRs in India), etc. These requirements also apply to the following services:
(a) Legal Business Process Outsourcing in India (Legal BPO in India),
(b) Legal Knowledge Process Outsourcing in India (Legal KPO in India),
(c) Legal Process Outsourcing in India (LPO in India),
(d) Other Outsourcing Services in India, etc.
There are certain “Pre-requisites” for a “Successful” Legal BPO, Legal KPO and LPO base in India. These pre-requisites are easy to mention but difficult to achieve. Perry4Law is committed to provide “High Quality” and “Globally Renowned” Techno-Legal, Managerial, Financial services in association with its National and International Associates and Partners. It recommends the following “Parameters” that LOSPs must possess:
(a) Capacity: The Legal Outsourcing Service Provider (LOSP) must be “Capable” of providing the Services claimed to be within its competency. This is more so vis-à-vis LPO and Legal KPO Services.
(b) Legal Potential: If possible, the service seekers must “Choose” and “Prefer” the Companies and Firms that are “actually dealing in Legal matters”. The trend of hiring few law graduates and opening of a Legal BPO Department by Traditional and Non-Legal Companies and Firms may not be very effective when it comes to KPO and LPO matters. It is always preferable to hire the services of those who are “Exclusively Specialising” in the Services provided.
(c) Domain Specific Services: Legal KPO and LPO are “Domain Specific Services” and the service seekers must make it sure that the persons ultimately handling the matter are “Experts” or “Well-Qualified” to manage the work. For instance, Legal BPO may be taken care of by simple law graduate from any law University but when it comes to Legal KPO and LPO, a “Master Degree” in Law from the “Premier Law Institution” is an “Additional Safeguard”.
(d) Security Measures: The growing use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in India (ICT in India) has its adverse ramifications as well. Thus, the LOSPs must ensure a “Safe” and “Secure” ICT Infrastructure that must be capable of providing an “Uninterrupted”, “Safe” and “Secure” online support. For instance, Perry4Law’s ICT and Cyber Security initiative titled as PTLB TM/SM is managing various Techno-Legal issues associated with the ICT and Cyber Security including protection of “Critical ICT Infrastructure in India”. This has provided Perry4Law the additional advantage of acquiring and possessing “Expertise” in “Techno-Legal Matters that are bound to arise in the near future.
(e) Data Protection and Privacy Preservation: Data Protection and Privacy Preservation are essential for a “Safe” and “Secure” Legal BPO/KPO/LPO platform. For instance, at Perry4Law every possible care is taken to protect and preserve the “Database” and “Details” of our “Clients” in the best possible manner.
(f) Credentials: The service seekers must always check the “Credentials” of the LOSPs before assigning any work to them. The use of search engines is a good option to have an “Idea” about various LOSPs.
(g) Research acumen: The search engines are also very useful to ascertain the “Research Acumen” of various LOSPs that lies at the heart of various Legal BPO/KPO/LPO services.
(h) National and International Recognition: The National and International recognition of the LOSP is a very crucial factor while outsourcing legal work. A LOSP possessing National and International “Reputation” is a much “Safer Bet” than “Self-Claimed Experts”.
These are some of the “Factors/Parameters” that may be considered by service seekers while outsourcing Legal BPO/KPO/LPO assignments to LOSPs. They are neither “Exhaustive” nor “Conclusive” but are illustrative and suggestive only. There may be other factors as well that may play a “Conclusive Role” in the Legal BPO/KPO/LPO game. Besides, “Personal Preferences” and “Relationships” may be there that suit the requirements of a particular service seeker. These “Parameters” only reflect the “Domain Specific” and “Extensive” Knowledge and Research Capabilities of Companies and Firms like Perry4Law. With more and more International and National Partners, Perry4Law is “Confident” that it will go a long way in making India a “Favourite”, “Safe”, “Secure” and “Reliable” business destination in general and Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Provider in particular. We also hope that various initiatives of Perry4Law would go a long way in providing a sound “Techno-Legal Support” to India so that it can match the International Standards and Norms. At the same time, these initiatives aptly ensure that the “Data Protection and Privacy Requirements” are duly met so that Legal BPO in India, Legal KPO in India and LPO in India can thrive to their level best.
© Praveen Dalal. All rights reserved with the author.
* Advocate, Arbitrator and Consultant, Supreme Court of India.
Managing Partner-Perry4Law (First Techno-Legal and ICT Firm, New Delhi, India).
LL.M, Ph.D –Cyber Forensics (Pursuing).
Contact at: perry4law@yahoo.com , pd37@rediffmail.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://reclaiming-india.blogspot.com/ and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
India is a favourite destination for various outsourcing related matters. The same is going to increase further in future. These outsourcing services also require a dedicated and legal framework complaint service providing base. It includes a compliance with the Cyber Law of India, adherence to the protection and enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in India (IPRs in India), etc. These requirements also apply to the following services:
(a) Legal Business Process Outsourcing in India (Legal BPO in India),
(b) Legal Knowledge Process Outsourcing in India (Legal KPO in India),
(c) Legal Process Outsourcing in India (LPO in India),
(d) Other Outsourcing Services in India, etc.
There are certain “Pre-requisites” for a “Successful” Legal BPO, Legal KPO and LPO base in India. These pre-requisites are easy to mention but difficult to achieve. Perry4Law is committed to provide “High Quality” and “Globally Renowned” Techno-Legal, Managerial, Financial services in association with its National and International Associates and Partners. It recommends the following “Parameters” that LOSPs must possess:
(a) Capacity: The Legal Outsourcing Service Provider (LOSP) must be “Capable” of providing the Services claimed to be within its competency. This is more so vis-à-vis LPO and Legal KPO Services.
(b) Legal Potential: If possible, the service seekers must “Choose” and “Prefer” the Companies and Firms that are “actually dealing in Legal matters”. The trend of hiring few law graduates and opening of a Legal BPO Department by Traditional and Non-Legal Companies and Firms may not be very effective when it comes to KPO and LPO matters. It is always preferable to hire the services of those who are “Exclusively Specialising” in the Services provided.
(c) Domain Specific Services: Legal KPO and LPO are “Domain Specific Services” and the service seekers must make it sure that the persons ultimately handling the matter are “Experts” or “Well-Qualified” to manage the work. For instance, Legal BPO may be taken care of by simple law graduate from any law University but when it comes to Legal KPO and LPO, a “Master Degree” in Law from the “Premier Law Institution” is an “Additional Safeguard”.
(d) Security Measures: The growing use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in India (ICT in India) has its adverse ramifications as well. Thus, the LOSPs must ensure a “Safe” and “Secure” ICT Infrastructure that must be capable of providing an “Uninterrupted”, “Safe” and “Secure” online support. For instance, Perry4Law’s ICT and Cyber Security initiative titled as PTLB TM/SM is managing various Techno-Legal issues associated with the ICT and Cyber Security including protection of “Critical ICT Infrastructure in India”. This has provided Perry4Law the additional advantage of acquiring and possessing “Expertise” in “Techno-Legal Matters that are bound to arise in the near future.
(e) Data Protection and Privacy Preservation: Data Protection and Privacy Preservation are essential for a “Safe” and “Secure” Legal BPO/KPO/LPO platform. For instance, at Perry4Law every possible care is taken to protect and preserve the “Database” and “Details” of our “Clients” in the best possible manner.
(f) Credentials: The service seekers must always check the “Credentials” of the LOSPs before assigning any work to them. The use of search engines is a good option to have an “Idea” about various LOSPs.
(g) Research acumen: The search engines are also very useful to ascertain the “Research Acumen” of various LOSPs that lies at the heart of various Legal BPO/KPO/LPO services.
(h) National and International Recognition: The National and International recognition of the LOSP is a very crucial factor while outsourcing legal work. A LOSP possessing National and International “Reputation” is a much “Safer Bet” than “Self-Claimed Experts”.
These are some of the “Factors/Parameters” that may be considered by service seekers while outsourcing Legal BPO/KPO/LPO assignments to LOSPs. They are neither “Exhaustive” nor “Conclusive” but are illustrative and suggestive only. There may be other factors as well that may play a “Conclusive Role” in the Legal BPO/KPO/LPO game. Besides, “Personal Preferences” and “Relationships” may be there that suit the requirements of a particular service seeker. These “Parameters” only reflect the “Domain Specific” and “Extensive” Knowledge and Research Capabilities of Companies and Firms like Perry4Law. With more and more International and National Partners, Perry4Law is “Confident” that it will go a long way in making India a “Favourite”, “Safe”, “Secure” and “Reliable” business destination in general and Legal BPO/KPO/LPO Provider in particular. We also hope that various initiatives of Perry4Law would go a long way in providing a sound “Techno-Legal Support” to India so that it can match the International Standards and Norms. At the same time, these initiatives aptly ensure that the “Data Protection and Privacy Requirements” are duly met so that Legal BPO in India, Legal KPO in India and LPO in India can thrive to their level best.
© Praveen Dalal. All rights reserved with the author.
* Advocate, Arbitrator and Consultant, Supreme Court of India.
Managing Partner-Perry4Law (First Techno-Legal and ICT Firm, New Delhi, India).
LL.M, Ph.D –Cyber Forensics (Pursuing).
Contact at: perry4law@yahoo.com , pd37@rediffmail.com
“ The above article has been reprinted from http://reclaiming-india.blogspot.com/ and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Much Ado About Nothing
In the past few weeks, India was witnessing a new form of censorship. The works of a fine arts student of Maharaja Sayajirao University of Vadodara were vandalized by communal activists on the ground that student has negatively portrayed the deities and there by hurt the religious sentiments of the community. While the artists are making a hue and cry over the “trespass” over their creative domain, the so-called moral watch dogs are agitated about the “attack” on their personal beliefs. On which side, does the truth lie? Obviously, this standoff between creativity and intolerance is nothing new to our country. Being a pluralistic society, we have always been open to diverse interpretations of art and culture and eloquently debated the metes and bounds of artistic freedom. However, the frequency and decibels of such dissenting voices has gone up in recent times and the way the protests were carried out defies the democratic ethos and reasonable restraint expected from a secular pluralistic society. The erstwhile land of diversity, brotherhood and tolerance has suddenly become the abode of some temperamental touch-me-nots whose religious sensitivities are hurt at the drop of a hat!
The Bizarre Paradox
India, as a melting pot of cultures is home to a vivid and versatile artistic tradition, which is subjected to all sorts of experimentations. Every artistic work bears the indelible imprimatur of the artist’s passions, choices, predilections and prejudices, and it is the manifestation of his/her wildest dreams and fantasies. We cannot expect them to be realistic and conforming all the time. If he/she is asked to get in to the straight jackets of contemporary morality, it is like asking a sculptor to chisel the statue to fit in to a particular mould, a shape agreed to by every one. But then is the notion of contemporary morality reflects such unanimous choice or a collective conscience of the connoisseurs of art? How can it be for such a diverse and distinct society? Artists draw flak whenever they stray away from the trodden path and try to revisit the settled notions and beliefs. We cannot insist that an art form should neatly fit in to some pigeonholes of contemporary notions of religion and individual beliefs. The society should criticize, debate and discuss an artistic work and should very well decide to accept or reject it. But it should stop there.
The Buck Stops Here
Once again, religious iconography has become a burning issue. When individual beliefs feels threatened by the divergent voices and need reassurances, it is setting a different precedent for India’s age-old virtue of tolerance. It seems the pluralistic state is on the verge of an identity crisis. However, this is not the dead end of tolerance in a democracy. We should clearly give space to divergent opinions as long as we have the freedom to accept or reject it. The constitution clearly stipulates how much noise we can make by defining the freedom of expression and the reasonable restrictions. When voice of dissent relegates into irrational noises of intolerance with preachy overtones, the constitutional guarantees are jeopardized. Moreover, we have penal laws to check whether artistic freedom relegates to licentiousness. The law contemplates such transgression only when there is deliberate and malicious intention for out raging the religious feelings. In Vadodara, the exhibition was not meant for the public and it was more a part of internal assessment, conducted with in the precincts of the University. The activists have no locus standi to question the internal matters of a University.
And finally, we should do a reality check as to how much these moral brigade were able to achieve. Remember the hullabaloo over the dress code imposed by Anna University, smoking in films has all failed to achieve the desired results. Even films which break away from stereo types are not spared. For instance, the film Nishabd which tells the story of a 60 year old man falls for his daughter’s friend was accused of sending the wrong signals. Is the average Indian waiting to be strayed into prohibited territories at the drop of a hat? What do we achieve by making there irrational noises? Of course, freedom of expression is an easy escape route to the artist. But it is a true test of tolerance to the society. Nevertheless, if we insist that artists should exercise restraint ignoring the compulsions of creativity, what would be the end product like? Living in a democratic secular society, the compulsions we face are quite different as the demarcations are too close and any mix up will trigger a controversy. For the same reason, what happened in Vadodara cannot be written off as one odd incident. Political forces are brewing a deadly concoction by mixing religion and politics in poisonous proportions. To determine what is objectionable and what is not by defining contemporary mortality is too dangerous a task to be left to the discretion of communal forces that holds a jaundiced view of religion. Culture offers a shared platform where every one has their due. Obviously, this is the most prized feature of a democracy, that every one has an opinion. And it has the flip side too- that every one has got a veto power. True democracy lies in the reconciliation of these conflicting notions. And unfortunately, we have forgotten the best means of squaring off the differences. Universities are laboratories of experimentation and academic discussions and debates as part of the curriculum should be left alone. Now the scenario is cluttered by too many voices, and it needs time for the heat and dust to set in. After all, why do we need to join some opinionated bandwagons to determine the metes and bounds of artistic creativity? Much ado about nothing. Art transcends religion, culture and other human barriers. If one’s belief is genuine and convictions are strong, it cannot be shaken by a different portrayal by an artist.
-
Seema Sarathkumar
Staff Attorney of legalEase Solutions LLC
The Bizarre Paradox
India, as a melting pot of cultures is home to a vivid and versatile artistic tradition, which is subjected to all sorts of experimentations. Every artistic work bears the indelible imprimatur of the artist’s passions, choices, predilections and prejudices, and it is the manifestation of his/her wildest dreams and fantasies. We cannot expect them to be realistic and conforming all the time. If he/she is asked to get in to the straight jackets of contemporary morality, it is like asking a sculptor to chisel the statue to fit in to a particular mould, a shape agreed to by every one. But then is the notion of contemporary morality reflects such unanimous choice or a collective conscience of the connoisseurs of art? How can it be for such a diverse and distinct society? Artists draw flak whenever they stray away from the trodden path and try to revisit the settled notions and beliefs. We cannot insist that an art form should neatly fit in to some pigeonholes of contemporary notions of religion and individual beliefs. The society should criticize, debate and discuss an artistic work and should very well decide to accept or reject it. But it should stop there.
The Buck Stops Here
Once again, religious iconography has become a burning issue. When individual beliefs feels threatened by the divergent voices and need reassurances, it is setting a different precedent for India’s age-old virtue of tolerance. It seems the pluralistic state is on the verge of an identity crisis. However, this is not the dead end of tolerance in a democracy. We should clearly give space to divergent opinions as long as we have the freedom to accept or reject it. The constitution clearly stipulates how much noise we can make by defining the freedom of expression and the reasonable restrictions. When voice of dissent relegates into irrational noises of intolerance with preachy overtones, the constitutional guarantees are jeopardized. Moreover, we have penal laws to check whether artistic freedom relegates to licentiousness. The law contemplates such transgression only when there is deliberate and malicious intention for out raging the religious feelings. In Vadodara, the exhibition was not meant for the public and it was more a part of internal assessment, conducted with in the precincts of the University. The activists have no locus standi to question the internal matters of a University.
And finally, we should do a reality check as to how much these moral brigade were able to achieve. Remember the hullabaloo over the dress code imposed by Anna University, smoking in films has all failed to achieve the desired results. Even films which break away from stereo types are not spared. For instance, the film Nishabd which tells the story of a 60 year old man falls for his daughter’s friend was accused of sending the wrong signals. Is the average Indian waiting to be strayed into prohibited territories at the drop of a hat? What do we achieve by making there irrational noises? Of course, freedom of expression is an easy escape route to the artist. But it is a true test of tolerance to the society. Nevertheless, if we insist that artists should exercise restraint ignoring the compulsions of creativity, what would be the end product like? Living in a democratic secular society, the compulsions we face are quite different as the demarcations are too close and any mix up will trigger a controversy. For the same reason, what happened in Vadodara cannot be written off as one odd incident. Political forces are brewing a deadly concoction by mixing religion and politics in poisonous proportions. To determine what is objectionable and what is not by defining contemporary mortality is too dangerous a task to be left to the discretion of communal forces that holds a jaundiced view of religion. Culture offers a shared platform where every one has their due. Obviously, this is the most prized feature of a democracy, that every one has an opinion. And it has the flip side too- that every one has got a veto power. True democracy lies in the reconciliation of these conflicting notions. And unfortunately, we have forgotten the best means of squaring off the differences. Universities are laboratories of experimentation and academic discussions and debates as part of the curriculum should be left alone. Now the scenario is cluttered by too many voices, and it needs time for the heat and dust to set in. After all, why do we need to join some opinionated bandwagons to determine the metes and bounds of artistic creativity? Much ado about nothing. Art transcends religion, culture and other human barriers. If one’s belief is genuine and convictions are strong, it cannot be shaken by a different portrayal by an artist.
-
Seema Sarathkumar
Staff Attorney of legalEase Solutions LLC
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Outsourcing craze sees Indian firms take over jobs in finance, law and health
By Sumeet Chatterjee
Chennai - In an office in the southern port of Chennai, Indian analysts pore over stock market data for a London fund company, searching for investment opportunities.
Some 1900km away in Gurgaon, on the outskirts of Delhi, Indian lawyers have taken over research and patent filing for several Western technology and healthcare companies.
These are examples of knowledge process outsourcing, or KPO, a new fad where Indian companies are trying to move up the value chain and away from call centres staffed by young people tutored in American accents.
As well as examining financial data and drafting patents, firms in India are managing payrolls and accounts for Western companies and doing market research and other high-value tasks.
The knowledge process market in India is worth US$2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) to US$3 billion a year, and is likely to grow to US$10 billion to US$12 billion by 2012, says Ashish Gupta, chief operating officer of Evalueserve, a knowledge process firm with 1500 employees in India, China and Chile.
Driving this boom are huge cost savings for Western companies and bigger fees for Indian companies than they can earn from call centres. Although salaries in India are rising, they are way below Western wages.
Patent research can be done in India at US$50 to US$80 an hour, compared with US$150 to US$350 in the United States, says R. Sivadas, chief executive of Scope e-Knowledge Centre in Chennai, which has clients in publishing, healthcare, and engineering.
Average billing rates in the knowledge process sector are 40 to 50 per cent higher than those in the call centres, says Sivadas, whose company employs 485 people, 95 per cent of them engineers and medical doctors.
"We have just touched the tip of the iceberg. In the next six to eight years, KPO is definitely going to be a growth story," says Sivadas, whose firm will increase staff to 680 by March 2008.
Another such firm is Sundaram Finance, which set up a back-office subsidiary six years ago to provide research services to local financial firms and now has 23 clients from Britain, Australia, Singapore and the Middle East who have outsourced jobs like market and data research.
In January, India's Hinduja TMT and British business consulting and outsourcing firm Centric Consulting entered into a joint venture with law firm Fox Mandal Little to provide legal outsourcing services.
Indian software majors Infosys Technologies and Wipro are also vying for a bigger share of the outsourcing business.
Infosys made US$147.52 million in profit from all business process outsourcing in its most recent fiscal year, 8 per cent of it from these high-value, knowledge tasks.
The growth in knowledge process outsourcing has come on the back of India's pool of English-speaking talent and its lower wages, but there is a looming shortage in graduates in business management, engineering, financial research, law, accounting and medicine.
"There are two issues in terms of manpower - in quantity, there is no problem, but in terms of quality there is definitely an issue," Sivadas says.
India produces about half a million technically trained graduates, 300,000 postgraduates and doctoral candidates and 20,000 lawyers every year, but many are unsuitable.
"A lot of time, money and effort are spent in finding right candidates," Sivadas says. "It's not as easy as the numbers make it out to be. You just can't pick people off the street."
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.nzherald.co.nz and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Chennai - In an office in the southern port of Chennai, Indian analysts pore over stock market data for a London fund company, searching for investment opportunities.
Some 1900km away in Gurgaon, on the outskirts of Delhi, Indian lawyers have taken over research and patent filing for several Western technology and healthcare companies.
These are examples of knowledge process outsourcing, or KPO, a new fad where Indian companies are trying to move up the value chain and away from call centres staffed by young people tutored in American accents.
As well as examining financial data and drafting patents, firms in India are managing payrolls and accounts for Western companies and doing market research and other high-value tasks.
The knowledge process market in India is worth US$2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) to US$3 billion a year, and is likely to grow to US$10 billion to US$12 billion by 2012, says Ashish Gupta, chief operating officer of Evalueserve, a knowledge process firm with 1500 employees in India, China and Chile.
Driving this boom are huge cost savings for Western companies and bigger fees for Indian companies than they can earn from call centres. Although salaries in India are rising, they are way below Western wages.
Patent research can be done in India at US$50 to US$80 an hour, compared with US$150 to US$350 in the United States, says R. Sivadas, chief executive of Scope e-Knowledge Centre in Chennai, which has clients in publishing, healthcare, and engineering.
Average billing rates in the knowledge process sector are 40 to 50 per cent higher than those in the call centres, says Sivadas, whose company employs 485 people, 95 per cent of them engineers and medical doctors.
"We have just touched the tip of the iceberg. In the next six to eight years, KPO is definitely going to be a growth story," says Sivadas, whose firm will increase staff to 680 by March 2008.
Another such firm is Sundaram Finance, which set up a back-office subsidiary six years ago to provide research services to local financial firms and now has 23 clients from Britain, Australia, Singapore and the Middle East who have outsourced jobs like market and data research.
In January, India's Hinduja TMT and British business consulting and outsourcing firm Centric Consulting entered into a joint venture with law firm Fox Mandal Little to provide legal outsourcing services.
Indian software majors Infosys Technologies and Wipro are also vying for a bigger share of the outsourcing business.
Infosys made US$147.52 million in profit from all business process outsourcing in its most recent fiscal year, 8 per cent of it from these high-value, knowledge tasks.
The growth in knowledge process outsourcing has come on the back of India's pool of English-speaking talent and its lower wages, but there is a looming shortage in graduates in business management, engineering, financial research, law, accounting and medicine.
"There are two issues in terms of manpower - in quantity, there is no problem, but in terms of quality there is definitely an issue," Sivadas says.
India produces about half a million technically trained graduates, 300,000 postgraduates and doctoral candidates and 20,000 lawyers every year, but many are unsuitable.
"A lot of time, money and effort are spent in finding right candidates," Sivadas says. "It's not as easy as the numbers make it out to be. You just can't pick people off the street."
“ The above article has been reprinted from www.nzherald.co.nz and LegalEase Solutions LLC does not hold any rights to the same”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
