The separation between “traditional” and “non-traditional lawyering” is increasingly apparent in today’s legal landscape. Your task is to anticipate and understand how your career will flow through this system.
Every individual at some stage of his or her professional life is faced with the profound question, “Am I making the right choice?” To quote Charles Lamb, “The measure of choosing well is, whether a man likes and finds good in what he has chosen.” However, this one step – choosing a goal and standing by it – changes everything!
Broadly speaking, a career in law comprises two main streams, viz., litigation practice and corporate practice (within either law firms, companies or other organisations). In addition to practicing in courts, today’s lawyers can choose to become part of corporate law firms or join a corporate enterprise in the capacity of an inhouse counsel. This predicament of having to choose between corporate practice and litigation practice exists for a diverse majority, including fresh law graduates, prospective law students, besides professionals from other unrelated or related fields desirous of taking the plunge in the increasingly competitive legal profession.
In order to choose between litigation and transactional work, one needs to evaluate one’s interest and capabilities in these two areas. An interest in complicated fact patterns, especially those involving conflicts; excellent communication skills; belief in the adversarial mode and vindication of important rights, indicates that litigation will be more suitable.
On the other hand, if one believes in strategic alliances rather than conflict, and if economic and financial data is of interest, then a corporate or transactional practice will be more suitable. This may also appear to be a viable option for those who are dissatisfied with the limits of litigation as a method of dispute resolution.
Sometimes the content of the practice is an indicator which helps in overcoming the dilemma of making the choice between the two areas of practice. For instance, if one is dissatisfied with indiscriminate litigation and prefers advocating for a single cause; or one is dealing with ‘litigation conflict’, i.e., the feeling that one is constantly on the wrong side of every issue, all these point unfavourably towards choosing litigation practice as a suitable choice of career. Similarly, one may enjoy corporate or business practice and the thrill of fructification of mega-deals involving mergers and acquisitions. One may also explore working with small businesses or start-up ventures, which gives one an opportunity to directly deal with those clients whose livelihood depends upon one’s services.
“With legal profession getting sophisticated by the day, fueled by the economic growth of the nation as a whole, law graduates today are taking a direct plunge into corporate jobs taking advantage of the innumerable diverse opportunities which did not exist earlier.”
A study of litigation practice vis-à-vis corporate practice reveals an equal number of vital or essential factors for both areas. Litigation is preferred by those who already have an existing setup, including family or parental practice. Although litigation is considered a lucrative option, it often takes years to establish a litigation practice. Even then, some amount of uncertainty is always attached to this field. Whereas, in the transactional side, since the clientele comprises primarily of multi-national corporations and big corporate houses, one can expect handsome remuneration from the outset.
Litigation offers exposure to wide-ranging issues depending on the clientele. For instance, one can choose between matters involving domestic abuse, employment issues, service matters, medical malpractice, crime accusation, so on and so forth. Corporate law practice primarily involves two key requirements of corporate sectors, i.e., advice on compliance with various laws or corporate governance for effective functioning of business and advice on mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, etc. It is often argued that by being a part of the in-house legal team of a corporate enterprise or working in a corporate law firm dealing in transactional work, lawyers tend to get straight-jacketed into a particular area or field, for instance, a contract lawyer will primarily be involved in contract negotiation and drafting of agreements, joint ventures and the like.
A study in contrast between the two fields is aptly summed up by Amit Aggarwal, Partner, SN Gupta & Co., “Gone are the days when court room battles were the only front. The new-age generation lawyers seem to be happier opting for board room battles rather than court room battles. With markets opening up and the investments pouring in from foreign countries, the need of legal counsels for corporate advisory work has increased. Even the nature of legal assistance expected from legal counsels has undergone drastic change. Now legal assistance is required in the fields of employment laws, foreign exchange laws, capital market related activities, acquisition transactions, etc.”
In the United Kingdom, legal services are rendered by two distinct classes of legal professionals — barristers and solicitors. The barrister’s role is litigation, i.e., representing clients in the courts, whereas the solicitor renders advice on wide-ranging issues, including transactional work (excluding litigation). In India, however, there is no such distinction. The above-referred two roles are merged. The Advocates Act, 1961 states that there is only one recognised class of persons entitled to practice the profession of law, viz., an Advocate. Therefore, an Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of India is competent to perform the role of a barrister as well as a solicitor.
As recent as a decade ago, the practice of law was by and large confined to courts, tribunals and arbitration forums. However, all that has now changed! Today’s young breed of lawyers has several options to choose from. The advent of economic liberalisation and globalisation has resulted in an insatiable demand for legal professionals. Today, India is one of the fastest growing economies, with corporate law being the fastest growing area within the legal practice. Consequently, the importance of accurate and swift corporate legal advice cannot be ignored.
Keshav S Dhakad, Director- IPR & License Compliance, Legal and Corporate Affairs, Microsoft India opines, “With legal profession getting sophisticated by the day, fueled by the economic growth of the nation as a whole, law graduates today are taking a direct plunge into corporate jobs taking advantage of the innumerable diverse
“Gone are the days when court room battles were the only front. The new-age generation lawyers seem to be happier opting for board room battles rather than court room battles. With markets opening up and the investments pouring in from foreign countries, the need of legal counsels for corporate advisory work has increased. Even the nature of legal assistance expected from legal counsels has undergone drastic change. Now legal assistance is required in the fields of employment laws, foreign exchange laws, capital market related activities, acquisition transactions, etc.”
“While studying law, majority of law students dream of having their own practice. However, seeing the difficulties inherent in litigation, a vast majority of fresh law graduates either do not join litigation at all or leave it after a short stint. The trend is apparent in the lower/trial courts, where fresh law graduates are increasingly becoming a scarce commodity. The reasons for the same are not far to seek, most important of these being the lure of better financial prospects. In litigation, the remuneration is on an extremely low side. A position in a law firm, company, or even LPO, is more financially acceptable. Apart from the financial prospects, the long gestation period of establishing oneself in the field of litigation is the other major stumbling block. A serious fallout of this trend is that fresh law graduates are increasingly losing out on the hands-on court experience, which is not advisable for their overall development as a lawyer. Neither it is good for the future of litigation.”
opportunities which did not exist earlier.” This trend has led to the establishment of an overwhelming number of corporate law firms in the recent past.
It is estimated that approximately more than five million practitioners are engaged in litigation, the chief players being individual lawyers and family-run law firms. Despite the long gestation period, a stint in litigation is considered indispensible by many. As Dhakad opines, “While choices need to be respected, in this process the fresh law graduates do miss out on an important step towards becoming an all-round lawyer, which only litigation or a law firm practice can teach. Ideally, a graduate should consider in-house corporate practice only after he or she has spent a minimum of five to six years in a law firm and/or practicing before the courts. Among many, the fundamental advantages of joining litigation is about harnessing the skills of drafting legal arguments and written communication, law research, analysis and judgment, eye for detail and ability to handle volume of work, multi-client portfolios, nuances of court procedure, oratory argumentative skills, a sense of urgency in providing relief to a client, while still exercising patience.”
Furthermore, it is often felt that since big, hierarchical law firms demand extraordinary working hours and commitment from their employees, leaving one with little time, personal goals of autonomy are not likely to be reached in such organisations. Consequently, for many litigation practice is a more appealing option. Similarly, transactional lawyers in firms also tend to become dissatisfied with the limited emphasis given to the legal structuring of transactions and the importance given to the broader business strategy considerations that drive such transactions. Having said that, in today’s business driven economy the ‘robe-clad’ lawyer is no longer as appealing as in the past.
Career decisions of young lawyers at the threshold of their career are influenced by the nature of legal work because of the insatiable urge to acquire and master new skills. The client’s best interest become important as lawyers acquire skills and decide to shift their focus to the areas in which those skills can be implemented. The first part of a career, whether in litigation or corporate, is a combination of doing the tedious work and learning professional techniques. While doing the tedious work can be unpleasant, learning the professional techniques, whether it is taking a deposition in a litigation or attending negotiations of an agreement in a corporate transaction, is interesting, as long as one is open to the process of learning.
It will be safe to conclude that gone are the days when being a lawyer only meant being a robe-clad barrister. The separation between ‘traditional’ and ‘non-traditional’ lawyering is increasingly apparent in the contemporary legal landscape. Now-a-days, a corporate lawyer multi-tasks as a business consultant, arbitrator as well as a deal-maker.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
