Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 22

• HOME

• CONSUMER COMPLAINT
• CONTACT US
• HALL OF FAME
• OUR MISSION
• SEEK A LEGAL OPINION
• WILL DRAFTING FACILITY
• WRITE AN ARTICLE
JurisOnline.in
From Legal Information to Knowledge
“A bar on advertising for advocates in India under Advocates Act,1961 and Bar Council of India
Rules”
by TRUSHIL VORA on FEBRUARY 2, 2008

After the Second World War the International Economic Order which emerged, encouraged Free
Trade in goods. India was a founder signatory to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) since 1947, which led to the formation of WTO, on 1stJanuary 1995.[1] This has led to a
whole wide debate in India over the stringent laws governing code of ethics and morality of
Legal Professionals on one hand and the WTO laws on the other hand. This has come in due to
the phenomenon of globalization developing world over. This debate revolves around major
issues pertaining to the objectives of legal profession, consumerism, social justice, Indian
commitment to WTO regime, competition law etc. Some professionals argue that the shift in
trade nature of legal services shall hamper ‘professional ethics’ and concept of ‘justice to all’.
[2] Some others say that the regulations imposed on the legal services sector are anti-competitive
and contrary to the goals and purpose of competition policy and Competition Act, 2002.[3]
At the heart of this controversy lies the issue of legal advertising. The lawyers in India are
barred from advertising their profession considering the profession to be a noble one and such
advertising to be derogatory to that profession.[4] Advertisements are a forum for establishing
the utility of goods and services. They generate awareness in public regarding the availability of
different brands of products/services, thereby, providing them with vast array of options to
choose from and keeping them fully informed. Further, it enhances and encourages competition
in the relevant market by providing a forum for launching of new products. Advertising is
considered as a necessary part of modern market economies, provided that it conforms to moral
standards based upon integral human development and the common good, which are “the most
efficient instrument for utilizing resources and effectively responding to needs” of a socio-
economic kind.[5] To cope up with the WTO laws and norms and looking at the current trend
which has subjected legal profession to trade laws, it has become inevitable to allow the legal
professionals to advertise and to rethink about the policy of law in India. People think whether
this kind of ban based on age old norms is viable in this modern era. The debate of the hour in
the Indian legal world is on why the profession should have very strict curbs on promoting its
services stemming from laws that originate from British thinking when the country from where it
originates has itself done away with the curbs?[6]
In the view of the above background, I would like to discuss the laws banning the advertising
for legal professionals in India and their implications, considering the position of such laws in
other developed countries owing to the WTO norms and globalization and the need to do away
with such age old laws.
CHAPTER I: The Law on Legal Advertising in India
After taking into account the recommendations of the Law Commission on the subject of
Reform of Judicial Administration relating to the Bar and to legal education and to implement
the recommendations of the All India Bar Committee made in 1953, the Indian Legislature came
up with the Advocates Act, 1961.[7] This act under the section 4 forms a Bar Council of India to
regulate all the legal professionals and legal education in India. The Bar Council of India is the
central institution for supervising and monitoring the growth and development of legal services
and the functioning of advocates and related firms and corporations in India.[8] Pursuant to the
functions of Bar Council of India under section 7 and its power to make rules under section 49 of
the said Act, it has enacted the Bar Council of India Rules which are binding on all the legal
professionals in India.
The law under Bar Council of India Rules
As compared to other big common law countries like US and UK, advertising for lawyers in
India is still in their dreams. There is a complete ban on advertising for lawyers in India. The Bar
Council of India, pursuant to its functions mentioned under Section 7(1)(b)[9]of the Advocates
Act read with its powers to make rules under Section 49(1)(c)[10] has framed Rule 36 of the Bar
Council of India Rules under Section IV(Duty to Colleagues) of Chapter II(Standards of
Professional Conduct and Etiquette) of Part IV(Rules Governing Advocates). Rule 36 reads as
under:
“An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly,
whether by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal communications,
interviews not warranted by personal relations, furnishing or inspiring
newspaper comments or producing his photographs to be published in
connection with cases in which he has been engaged or concerned. His sign-
board or name-plate should be of a reasonable size. The sign-board or name-
plate or stationery should not indicate that he is or has been President or
Member of a Bar Council or of any Association or that he has been
associated with any person or organisation or with any particular cause or
matter or that he specialises in any particular type of worker or that he has
been a Judge or an Advocate General.”
Thus, it is against an advocate’s code of ethics to solicit or advertise work and amounts to a
misconduct on the part of the advocate. Both direct and indirect advertising is prohibited. An
advocate may not advertise his services through circulars, advertisements, touts, personal
communication or interviews not warranted by personal relations. Similarly, the following forms
of indirect advertising are prohibited:
i. by issuing circulars or election manifestos by a lawyer with his name,
profession and address printed on the manifestos, thereby appealing to the members
of the profession practising in the lower courts who are in a position to recommend
clients to counsel practising in the high court
ii. canvassing for votes by touring in the province or sending out his clerk or
agents to the various districts, which must necessarily mean directly approaching
advocates practising in subordinate courts.
Further, the signboard or nameplate displayed by an advocate should be of a reasonable size.
It should not refer to details of an affiliated by the advocate i.e. that he is or has been president or
member of a bar council or of any association, or he has been a Judge or an Advocate-General,
or that he specialises in a particular kind of work, or that he is or was associated with any person
or organisation or with any particular cause or matter.
Further advertising on internet is also prohibited. Bar Council of India, in a notice dated
21st October 1999, reaffirmed that such ‘advertisements’ on the Internet are considered an
offence. It ordered all the legal Websites to be withdrawn immediately, under threat of legal
action ranging from temporary suspension to permanent debarring of the lawyer from practice.
[11] Also publishing in online legal dictionaries is a bar for advocates. The above rule has been
vehemently enforced by the Bar Council of India, simply disregarding all the criticisms made
against this archaic rule.
The law under Bar Council of India Rules
The roots of this law are based on age old Victorian notions of British Common law.[12] The
conception of legal services as a ‘noble profession’ rather than services has resulted in the
formulation of such stringent and restrictive regulatory machinery. This law relating to bar on
advertisement for legal professionals has been justified on the grounds of public policy and
‘dignity of profession’.[13] Letting advertise, would lead to the commercialization of this noble
profession and would degrade it. Further, the words of Section IV of Chapter II of Part IV of Bar
Council of India Rules are clear i.e. “Duty to colleagues”. This means that the another reason
behind enactment of such a norm is to prevent the advocates, law firms, etc from enticing the
clients of their adversary and to snatch away the business of their adversary. Such a law is also
made in order to help the small and unknown advocates and firms to rise in the market and do
business. The purpose behind it is to prevent a set of lawyers from taking unreasonable
advantage otherwise the same names would appear time and again.[14] Also such a law prevents
lawyers from falling below their dignity in order to fetch clients by doing anything and thus
degrading the nature of the profession.
The Judiciary on this rule
The courts have more or less agreed with the view of the Bar Council and have implemented
the rule laid down by the Council pertaining to advertising. The Supreme Court of India
observed inBar Council of India v. M. V. Dhabolkar,[15] that “…..the canons of ethics and
propriety for the legal profession totally taboo conduct by way of soliciting, advertising,
scrambling and other obnoxious practices….” It further noted that “Law is not a trade, not
briefs, not merchandise, and so the heaven of commercial competition should not vulgarize the
legal profession”.
The Allahabad High Court[16] observed that self advertising tends to lower the dignity of
this honourable profession and is undoubtedly akin to touting. The Bombay High Court
in Government Pleader v. S, a Pleader[17] considered sending a circular postcard merely giving
the address and description as an improper conduct by the Advocate. The High Court of Madras
went one step ahead in SK Naicker v.Authorised Officer[18] and held that even a sign board or a
name-plate should be of a moderate size. It has been further observed that writing of articles for
publication in newspapers under his signature, where the writer describes himself as an Advocate
practicing in the court as a flagrant breach of professional etiquette.[19]
Thus, legal advertising by far is a taboo in India and the courts have more or less approved
and agreed with this rule framed by Bar Council of India.
CHAPTER II: Law in other Countries
Legal advertising has been an important and widely used tool of communication in many
common law countries and in most of the developed countries like US, UK, etc it is used by the
lawyers to promote their professional services. It is allowed in most of the countries with
regulations regulating it as compared to India where it is completely banned. In these countries
the regulation is done in order to avoid false, misleading and deceptive advertisements but
advertisements displaying truth are allowed.
Position in U.K.
The provision banning advertisement adopted in India has its roots in Victorian notions of
U.K. which considered each and every profession to be noble and stated that such a regulation is
necessary in order to preserve the dignity and nobility of this profession. Earlier, in U.K. too
advertising was banned for professionals like lawyers. But later this ban was lifted. The
Monopolies and Mergers Commission in 1970 and the review given by the Office of Fair
Trading in 1986 pointed out at the advantages of letting the professionals advertise and the
benefits availed by from relaxing such norms.[20] Ultimately the ban was lifted and the
restrictions lowered and thus legal marketing and legal advertising became a reality in U.K.[21]
Position in U.S.
In U.S. the position was somewhat similar to that in India until 1977. There was a complete
ban on advertising for legal professionals. This position took a complete U-turn after the decision
of the U.S. Supreme Court on 27th June 1977 in the case of Bates v. State Bar of Arizona.
[22] The Supreme Court validated legal advertising and invalidated the law of State Bar of
Arizona banning legal advertising by a majority of 5:4 holding such a law violative of First
Constitutional Amendment. Prior to this case, the U.S. Supreme Court validated commercial
advertisement and gave its scope in the 1942 case of Valentine v. Chrestensen. Later
in Bigelow v. Virginia (1975) and in Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens
Consumer Council Inc. (1976) the U.S. S.C. invalidated laws restraining ads marketing abortion
services and ads showing prices of prescription drugs on the basis that they violated First
Constitutional Amendment i.e. Freedom of Speech and Expression and held that “the free flow
of commercial information is indispensable.”[23] All these decisions were adopted in the Bates’
judgement by the US SC and it was held that truthful legal advertising should not be prohibited
as there is nothing wrong in it. The court invalidated in this appeal the law prohibiting legal
advertising holding it to be violative of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the First
Constitutional Amendment. Justice Blackmun argued that commercial speech does merit First
Amendment protection given the important functions it serves in society, such as providing
consumers with information about services and products, and helping to allocate resources in the
American system of free-enterprise.[24] The Court held that allowing attorneys to advertise
would not harm the legal profession or the administration of justice, and, in fact, would supply
consumers with valuable information about the availability and cost of legal services.[25] But the
states are allowed to regulate and monitor the advertising by advocates. This is evident from the
later judgements of various state Supreme Courts which have upheld the laws regulating and
restricting certain practices of legal advertising.[26]
Position in other countries
The position in other developed countries is also quite clear. Advertising is allowed in most
of the countries. In France, though the law is not that liberal, it stands somewhere between Indian
and U.K. position. There is not a complete ban on advertising.[27] Also in Italy, the legal
marketing has been legalized by the Bersani Decree of 2004 which was enforced in 2007.
[28] This has been true for most of the European countries like Germany, Spain, etc.[29] Legal
Advertising is a reality everywhere.
Besides countries in the West, Asian countries such as Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia
have been progressively relaxing their regulations on legal advertising to adapt to global
demands.[30] For instance, Malaysia’s Legal Profession (Publicity) Rules, passed in 2001 is a
simple yet comprehensive code that regulates advertisements in legal and non-legal directories,
controls publication of journals, magazines, brochures and newsletters by lawyers and interviews
in electronic and print media, bars publicity through clients and even includes a rule that
regulates lawyers sending greeting cards on special occasions. In Hong Kong, lawyers are
forbidden from advertising on television, radio and cinema. Though advertising in print is
permissible, larger firms prefer alternative strategies such as engaging in aggressive client and
public relations programmes and branding exercises. Even in Singapore the legal advertisements
are allowed with certain restrictions.[31]
Thus, it is clear that most of the countries have adopted a liberal policy towards legal
advertising and has allowed it to meet the global demands and compete with the other countries.
This has resulted only in advantages and benefits for those countries and no harm is done on the
contrary.
CHAPTER III: The Constitutional validity of Rule 36
The Rule 36 of Bar Council of India Rules, prohibit advocates from advertising. This is
against fundamental rights guaranteed under A. 19 of Constitution of India. This Rule cannot be
challenged with regards to A.19(1)(a) i.e. freedom of speech and expression as done in US in the
case of Bates v. Arizona State Bar, because of the decision of Indian Supreme Court in the case
of Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union Of India.[32] The Supreme Court came on to decide validity
of law banning advertisement for the sale of certain medicines in this case against A. 19(1)(a) of
Constitution of India. The Court held that:
“An advertisement is no doubt a form of speech but its true character is
reflected by the object for the promotion of which it is employed. It assumes
the attributes and elements of the activity under Art. 19 (1) which it seeks to
aid by bringing it to the notice of the public. When it takes the form of a
commercial advertisement which has an element of trade-or commerce it no
longer falls within the concept of freedom of speech for the object is not
propagation of ideas - social political or economic or furtherance of
literature or human thought; but as in the present case the commendation of
the efficacy, value and importance in treatment of particular diseases by
certain drugs and medicines. In such a case, advertisement is a part of
business even though as described by Mr. Munshi its creative part, and it was
being used for the purpose of furthering the business of the petitioners and
had no relationship with what may be called the essential concept of the
freedom of speech. It cannot be said that the right to publish and distribute
commercial advertisements advertising an individual’s personal business is a
part of freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution.”
In the view of the above decision, the commercial advertisement is not a part of freedom of
speech and expression and thus ban on advertisement for advocates is justified to be falling
within reasonable restriction as stated under A. 19(2). Thus, the ground on which the US
Supreme Court held this ban to be violative of Constitution is not available in the Indian
scenario.
The only remedy left is to challenge its constitutional validity against A. 19(1)(g) i.e.
freedom to carry on Trade, Profession or Business. Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India
confers every citizen with the right to choose his own employment or to take up any trade or
calling. This right is impregnated with an implied right for availing all the mechanisms and
resources – including advertising - for effective carrying of the trade or occupation provided it
doesn’t go against public interest. Any restriction on this right would be unreasonable unless it is
done in public interest. Advertisements can go against public interest only when it is immoral or
obscene or presents something which is illegal and goes against public morality. Any blanket bar
on this right would be unreasonable when there is an option of constituting a specialized
government body that would examine the content of the advertisement.[33]
The question that remains is whether legal profession falls under the category of trade or
business so as to avail the above right? Even though the judiciary in the words of Justice Krishna
Iyer, has held that Legal Profession is such a noble Profession that it cannot form a part of trade
or business,[34] the recent trend of the courts is to justify this profession as a trade. Over the
years, the courts have recognized ‘Legal Service’ as a ‘service’ rendered to the consumers and
have held that lawyers are accountable to the clients in the cases of deficiency of services. In the
case of Srinath v. Union of India, the Madras High Court held that, in view of Sec. 3 of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 that Consumer redressal forums have jurisdiction to deal with
claims against advocates. Sec. 2 (U) of the Competition Act, 2002 defines the term ‘Service’
along the lines of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Also the decision of Supreme Court
in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa,[35]holds that legal profession is
covered under the definition of the term Industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Further
it should be noted that India is a part of WTO and is subjected to WTO laws and legal services
are listed as a subsection of Business Services in WTO Services Sectoral Classification list.
[36] Thus, it could be concluded that legal services are becoming subject of trade related laws in
India where consumerism and market forces should be given adequate space.
In the view of the above background, the fundamental right to advertise guaranteed under A.
19(1)(g) can be given to the legal professionals to promote their services. This right thus, can be
taken away only by imposing a reasonable restriction under A. 19(6) of the Constitution. The
restriction must have a reasonable relation with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve
and must never exceed it.[37] The Supreme Court further observed that:
“Unless it is shown that there is a reasonable relation of the provisions of the
Act to the purpose in view, the right of freedom of occupation and business
cannot be curtailed by it……….. the phrase ‘reasonable restriction’ connotes
that the limitation imposed on a person in enjoyment of the right should not
be arbitrary or of an excessive nature,beyond what is required in the
interests of the public. The word ‘reasonable’ implies intelligent care and
deliberation, that is, the choice of a course which reason dictates. Legislation
which arbitrarily or excessively invades the right cannot be said to contain
the quality of reasonableness and unless it strikes a proper balance between
the freedom guaranteed in Art. 19 (1) (g) and the social control permitted by
cl. (6) of Art. 19, it must be held to be wanting in that quality.”
In the view of the above decision of the Supreme Court, I feel that this kind of total ban on
advertising for legal professionals laid down under Rule 36 is excessive in nature and is beyond
what is required in the interests of the public. Restrictions can be laid by regulating and
monitoring the advertising but not completely banning it as it would be going beyond what is
required as regulating the advertisement is sufficient in public interest. Thus, according to me,
Rule 36 is violative of A. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
Presently a writ petition is pending before the Indian Supreme Court challenging this rule of
Bar Council of India. The petition was filed by Mr. V. B. Joshi who is an advocate practicing in
the Supreme Court. In the last hearing of this matter in September 2007, the Government agreed
to relax this law a bit. The Government agreed to allow the lawyers advertise on their own
website and to enter their name into online directories but all these to be done under a committee
monitoring it.[38] But still all the other forms of advertisement are a bar for advocates and no
one knows when the Government would enforce these relaxations.
CHAPTER IV: Disadvantages of banning Legal Advertisements
Globalization brought about a revolution in international trade with increasing participation
and involvement of countries & greater access to domestic economies. The implication of the
same on the legal service sector has been both quantitative and qualitative. The past decade has
been mini-revolution in legal service sector with the greatest legal impact on corporate legal
arena Activities in project financing, intellectual property protection, environmental protection,
competition law, corporate taxation, infrastructure contract, corporate governance and
investment law were almost unknown before 90’s.In last few years Law Firms, in house firms
and individual lawyer’s expertise in providing legal services in corporate sector has increased by
several times.[39] Globalization has expanded the internal and external demand for legal
services.[40] Today trade in legal services is on inevitable fact and is at the same time significant
for progressive development of legal profession in India in this era of Globalization.[41]
Consumerism and Informed Choice
The emerging legal service sector is equally beneficial to all the consumers of legal services,
without discrimination.[42] In the age of consumerism and competition law, consumer’s right to
free and fair competition is paramount and cannot be denied by any other consideration.
[43] Trade in legal services focuses on benefits accruing to consumers from legal service sector,
particularly the quality of service available with respect to particular fields. Informed choice is
one of the rights of a consumer. Ban on advertising leads to depriving consumers of valuable
information about the advocates. This has resulted in a situation where consumers cannot make
an informed choice from the competitive market since information relating to the service is not
available to them. Moreover restriction on professional firms on informing potential users on
range of their services and potential causes further injury to the competition.[44]Also it is worthy
to note that the services available to consumers of India are only domestic legal service providers
and also the consumers most often are left at the mercy of advocates and the system and thus it is
very detrimental as they cannot resort to any other service provider in absence of choice.
Advertisement on Internet
Looking at the recent trend of Globalization and India joining the WTO, it has become
inevitable to let lawyers advertise to compete in the global market. Not allowing lawyers to
advertise has resulted in Indian lawyers loosing a lot of potential clients internationally. It is
realized that in this era of cyber age instead of turning to the Yellow Pages, the public
increasingly uses online search engines and other Internet tools to find needed goods and
services and with the concepts of legal process outsourcing increasing, i.e. to find cheap legal
services, people from countries like UK and US and other developed countries search for such
services online. For example, 35,309,524 people of the UK’s 59,889,407 population use the
internet (Internet World Stats 3/2/05). Between September and October 2004 the percentage
share of the market for broadband (i.e. always on internet connections) increased from 34.4% to
36% (National Statistics).[45] In December 2004 the following searches were made in U.K. for
solicitor services, across the search engines of Yahoo, MSN, Lycos, AOL, and Wanadoo (search
phrase followed by number of searches in one month:)
• Personal Injury Solicitor - 3,523
• Conveyancing Solicitor - 2,422
• Divorce Solicitor - 1,529
• Manchester Solicitor -1,197
This does not take into account the number of searches made across Google, still widely
accepted as the most used UK search engine.[46]But these searches results in not a single Indian
attorney or advocate or a law firm as India bans advertising by them as compared to other
neighbouring Asian countries which allow it and hence a lot of potential clients are lost, in turn
affecting the economy of India largely. Thus, India has lost lot of economic revenues and thus it
would be beneficial for India’s economy to lift the ban on advertising for advocates. The
Government has recently agreed on lifting it but only allowing the advocates to advertise on their
own websites and in online legal directories. But no one knows when this will be implemented.
Other disadvantages
The report of Monopolies and Mergers Commission in U.K. stated that restrictions on
advertisement by professionals reduce the stimulus to efficiency, cost saving, innovation, new
entry to professions and competition within the professions. Thus, new entrants who require to
establish their name in the market in order to get clients, are deprived of doing so through
advertising as this is the most simplest and easiest method to enter into a market. Also
restrictions enhance the more undesirable effects of less open methods of self promotion Also
they could give a false image to a profession.[47] Thus banning advertisement by lawyers is
completely disadvantageous to the Indian society as a whole.
Need for regulating the advertising
The need of the hour is to lift the total ban on advertising by advocates but not to completely
let it free. It is required to be regulated also. In case it is not monitored and regulated, then there
would be lot of malpractices of misrepresentation, deceptiveness and false advertisements which
would effect the society and degrade the nobility of this profession. The U.K.’s Monopolies and
Merger Commission in its report stated that the restrictions on legal advertising should be lifted
but the law must also provide that:
1. No advertisement, circular or other form of publicity used by the member should
claim for his practice superiority in any respect over any or all of the practices of
other members of the profession.
2. Such publicity should not contain any inaccuracies or misleading statements.
3. While advertisements, circulars and other publicity or methods of soliciting may
make clear the intention of the individual member to seek customer, they should not
be of a character that could reasonably be regarded as likely to bring the profession
into disrepute.
Thus, it is required that the advertising by legal professionals be regulated in order to avoid
instances of ambulance chasing, barratry, shokevertising, misrepresentation, etc. This kind of
regulation is also permissible under A. 19(1)(6) of Constitution of India in the interests of public.
CONCLUSION
The ban on legal advertisements in India has not proved healthy so far for the Indian
economy as well as Indian consumers. India has adopted WTO laws and a free market policy and
thus accepting ‘trade’ facet of legal services would develop this profession qualitatively. The
Raghvan Committee has summed up the effect of the existing regulatory system in professional
services as “…..the legislative restrictions in terms of law and self-regulation have the combined
effect of denying opportunities and growth of professional firms, restricting their desire and
ability to compete globally, preventing the country from obtaining advantage of India’s
considerable expertise and precluding consumers from opportunity of free and informed choice.”
Time is ripe to break shackles of this overwhelming regulation subjecting legal profession away
from modernity and banning it from advertising. India must remember its commitment to WTO
for opening service sectors including, legal services, globally. Thus all the regulations have to be
in conformity with competition policy and the Act. Hence, there is a craving need to lift this ban
and to form rules and policy to monitor and regulate legal advertising. A committee could be
formed to ensure compliance but laying blanket ban on legal advertising would hamper
development and growth of India.
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Articles, Websites, Reports and others:

1) Abhibav Kumar, “Lawyers must be allowed to advertise”, at


http://news.indlaw.com/guest/columns/default.asp?abhinav (last visited on
25th November, 2007).
2) Anubha Charan, “Is it unethical for lawyers to put up their own Website?”,
October 15, 2001, at http://www.rediff.com/search/2001/oct/15law.htm (last
visited on 24th November, 2007).
3) Bar Council Entry of Foreign Lawyers in India, August 30, 2003 at
http://www.news .indiainfo.com/ (last visited on 22nd November, 2007).
4) Bhadra Sinha, “Lawyers may be allowed web ads”, September 19, 2007, at
www.hindustantimes.com (last visited on 20th November 2007). Also see
Supra note 6.
5) Cyber Search - What Does Search Engine Marketing Mean For Solicitors?,
at http://www.samsonconsulting.co.uk/legal-marketing-article-cyber-
search.htm (last visited on November 25, 2007).
6) David L. Hudson, “Bates participants reflect on landmark case”, at
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=14394 (Last visited
on 22nd November, 2007)
7) http:// en.wikipedia.org/Legal_Advertising (last visited on 22nd November
2007).

Lawyer can’t be blamed if his name appears in print, says Punjab A-G,
May 25, 1999, at
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19990525/ige25114.htm
l (last visited on 18th November 2007).
9) Legal Websites, A World Wide Web Of Opportunies, at
http://www.samsonconsulting.co.uk/legal-marketing-article-solicitors-
websites.htm (last visited on 22nd November, 2007).
10) Malathi Nayak, India debates letting lawyers advertise, at
http://www.livemint.com/2007/10/21235346/India-debates-letting-
lawyers.html (last visited on 25th November, 2007).
11) Rajiv Dutta, “World Trade Organization and Legal Services: The Indian
Scenario”, at www.insolindia.com/shimlaPDFs/worldTradeOrg.pdf (last
visited on 23rd November, 2007).
12) Report on Trade in Legal Services, “Trade in Services: Opportunities and
Constraints”, Ministry of Commerce, Government of India, Executed by
Indian Council for Research in Economic Relations, Coordinator(s) N.L.
Mitra and T.C.A Anand.
13) Singh Lalithakumar I., “A View on Legal Profession”, AIR 2006 (Jour.) 1.
14) Statement of Objects and Reasons, The Advocates Act, 1961.
15) Swapnil Joshi, “Changing Face Of The Legal Profession In India In The Era
Of Globalization”, at http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/lprof.htm
(last visited on 25th November, 2007).
16) V K Aggarwal, “Professional Advertising: A comparative analysis in the
changing milieu”, 7th National Conference of Practising Company
Secretaries.
17) World Bank Report on Emerging Service Sector, 1999 quoted in The
Raghvan Committee Report on Competition Law, 2000.
18) www.legalmarketing.it (official legal marketing Italia website, last visited
on 24th November 2007).
Dictionaries:

1) H. Black, Black’s Law Dictionary (5th ed., St Paul: West Publishing Co.,
1979) 1059.
2) The Concise Oxford Thesaurus compiled by Kirkpatrick Betty; Oxford
University Press.
3) Webster’s New English Dictionary; Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers Inc,
2nd Edn 1995.
Case laws:
1) (Thirteen) Advoates, Allahabad, In the matter of, AIR 1934 All. 1067.
2) Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa, AIR 1978
SC 969; 1978 LabIC 778.
3) Bar Council of India v. M. V. Dhabolkar, AIR 1976 SC 242.
4) Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350.
5) Bigelow v. Virginia (1975) US.
6) Chintaman Rao v. State of M.P., AIR 1951 SC 118.
7) Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc. (1995) US.

Government Pleader v. S, a Pleader, AIR 1929 Bom. 335.


9) Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union Of India, AIR 1960 SC 554; 1960 (2) SCR
671.
10) Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC
1708.
11) In the matter of A, an Advocate, AIR 1962 SC 1337
12) Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice v. Bar Council of India, AIR
1995 SC 691;
13) Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association (1978) US.
14) SK Naicker v. Authorised Officer, (1967) 80 Mad. LW 153 at 154.
15) Srinath v. Union of India, AIR 1996 Mad 427.
16) Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942) US.
17) Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council
Inc. (1976) US.

[1] Rajiv Dutta, “World Trade Organization and Legal Services: The Indian Scenario”,
atwww.insolindia.com/shimlaPDFs/worldTradeOrg.pdf (last visited on 23rd November, 2007).
[2] Bar Council Entry of Foreign Lawyers in India, August 30, 2003 at http://www.news
.indiainfo.com/ (last visited on 22ndNovember, 2007).
[3] Swapnil Joshi, “Changing Face Of The Legal Profession In India In The Era Of
Globalization”, athttp://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/lprof.htm (last visited on 25th
November, 2007).
[4]See, Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice v. Bar Council of India, AIR 1995 SC 691; Se.
Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708.
[5] Abhibav Kumar, “Lawyers must be allowed to advertise”,
at http://news.indlaw.com/guest/columns/default.asp?abhinav(last visited on 25th November,
2007).
[6] Malathi Nayak, India debates letting lawyers advertise,
at http://www.livemint.com/2007/10/21235346/India-debates-letting-lawyers.html (last visited
on 25th November, 2007).
[7] See, Statement of Objects and Reasons, The Advocates Act, 1961.
[8] Supra at 5.
[9] S.7:Functions of the Bar Council of India: (1) The functions of the Bar Council of India
shall be – (b) to lay down standards of professional conduct and etiquette for advocates.
[10] S.49: General powers of Bar Council of India to make rules: (1) The Bar Council of
India may make rules for discharging its functions under this Act, and, in particular, such rules
may prescribe – (c) the standards of professional conduct and etiquette to be observed by
advocates.
[11] Anubha Charan, “Is it unethical for lawyers to put up their own Website?”, October 15,
2001, athttp://www.rediff.com/search/2001/oct/15law.htm (last visited on 24th November,
2007).
[12] Supra at 6.
[13] Supra at 4.
[14] Lawyer can’t be blamed if his name appears in print, says Punjab A-G, May 25, 1999,
athttp://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19990525/ige25114.html (last visited on
18th November 2007).
[15] AIR 1976 SC 242.
[16] See (Thirteen) Advoates, Allahabad, In the matter of, AIR 1934 All. 1067.
[17] AIR 1929 Bom. 335.
[18] (1967) 80 Mad. LW 153 at 154.
[19] See In the matter of A, an Advocate, AIR 1962 SC 1337; See also (Thirteen) Advoates,
Allahabad, In the matter of, AIR 1934 All. 1067.
[20] V K Aggarwal, “Professional Advertising: A comparative analysis in the changing milieu”,
7th National Conference of Practising Company Secretaries.
[21] Ibid.
[22] 433 U.S. 350.
[23] David L. Hudson, “Bates participants reflect on landmark case”,
at http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=14394 (Last visited on 22nd November,
2007)
[24] Supra at 22.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association (1978) and Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc. (1995).
[27]http:// en.wikipedia.org/Legal_Advertising (last visited on 22nd November 2007).
[28] www.legalmarketing.it (official legal marketing Italia website, last visited on 24th November
2007).
[29] Supra at 27.
[30] Supra at 6.
[31] Ibid.
[32] AIR 1960 SC 554; 1960 (2) SCR 671.
[33] AIR 1996 Mad 427.
[34] Supra note 15.
[35] AIR 1978 SC 969; 1978 LabIC 778.
[36] Supra note 1.
[37] Chintaman Rao v. State of M.P., AIR 1951 SC 118.
[38] Bhadra Sinha, “Lawyers may be allowed web ads”, September 19, 2007, at
www.hindustantimes.com (last visited on 20th November 2007). Also see Supra note 6.
[39] Report on Trade in Legal Services, “Trade in Services: Opportunities and Constraints”,
Ministry of Commerce, Government of India, Executed by Indian Council for Research in
Economic Relations, Coordinator(s) N.L. Mitra and T.C.A Anand.
[40] Singh Lalithakumar I., “A View on Legal Profession”, AIR 2006 (Jour.) 1.
[41] Supra at note 3.
[42] S. 19(d) of Competition Act, 2002.
[43] World Bank Report on Emerging Service Sector, 1999 quoted in The Raghvan Committee
Report on Competition Law, 2000.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Legal Websites, A World Wide Web Of Opportunies,
at http://www.samsonconsulting.co.uk/legal-marketing-article-solicitors-websites.htm (last
visited on 22nd November, 2007).
[46] Cyber Search - What Does Search Engine Marketing Mean For Solicitors?,
at http://www.samsonconsulting.co.uk/legal-marketing-article-cyber-search.htm (last visited on
November 25, 2007).
[47] Supra at 20.

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

kshama 01.09.10 at 10:46 pm


good information received by reading the article.
thank you
kRS
Leave a Comment

Top of Form

Name

E-mail

Website

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym
title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite="">
<strike> <strong>

Submit

Bottom of Form
• ARTICLE CATEGORIES

○ Case study (5)


○ Constitutional laws (25)
○ Corporate Laws (90)
○ Cyber Laws (19)
○ Environment laws (4)
○ Financial laws (8)
○ Foreign authors (1)
○ ICANN Policies (8)
○ Indian Corporate Policy (1)
○ Intellectual Property Rights(34)
○ International law (6)
○ Property laws (3)
○ Social Legislations (46)
○ Student Writeups (56)
○ Uncategorized (4)
• ARCHIVES

• SEARCH JURISONLINE.IN

Top of Form
To search, typ

Bottom of Form
• NEWS FLASH

[Coming soon!!!]
• LINKS

○ APRALO
○ Delhi High Court
○ Department of Information Technology
○ Department of Land Resources
○ Government of India Website
○ ICANN
○ India Code - Acts and Statutes
○ Indian Official Gazette
○ Intellectual Property Offices India
○ Ministry of Company Affairs
○ Ministry of Information and Braodcasting
○ National E-governance Plan
○ National Internet Exchange of India
○ Reserve Bank of India
○ Security & Exchange Board of India
○ Supreme Court of India
• IMPORTANT

 Disclaimer
 Terms of use
 Privacy Policy
• TRANSLATOR

Website Design & Hosting by Easytech


WordPress Admin