Supreme Court Seeks BCI’s Response on Online Advertisements for Lawyers
Last Updated on August 15, 2024 by NewsDesk SLC
The Supreme Court of India, on August 14, 2024, requested the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) response regarding the permissibility of online portals publishing advertisements for advocates. The request arose during a hearing of a petition by JustDial, an online directory service, challenging a Madras High Court ruling. The High Court had recently instructed the BCI to take action against advocates advertising their services through online platforms and against the platforms themselves for allowing such advertisements.
JustDial defended its role as merely providing a directory listing advocates’ names, qualifications, and practice areas, arguing that it does not solicit work for lawyers. Despite their request for a stay on the High Court’s directive, the Supreme Court declined, instead issuing a notice to the BCI. The Supreme Court highlighted the broader issue of maintaining ethical and professional standards within the legal profession.
The Madras High Court had strongly criticized lawyers who solicit work online, asserting that it violates the BCI Rules, specifically Rule 36, which prohibits legal professionals from advertising their services. Consequently, the Court instructed the BCI to guide State Bar Councils to initiate disciplinary proceedings against such practices.
Following this ruling, the BCI directed State Bar Councils to enforce stringent disciplinary measures against advocates advertising through online platforms. It also issued cease and desist notices to the CEOs of four major online platforms—Just Dial, Quikr, Sulekha, and Grotal—citing violations including illegal solicitation of work and improper rating and pricing of legal services.
The High Court rejected the websites’ defense that they were merely providing directory services. The Court noted that these platforms were offering legal services for a fixed price and independently rating lawyers without any legitimate basis, actions it deemed detrimental to the profession’s dignity. The Court emphasized that legal practice is a service to society, not a business, and ruled that the BCI should pursue legal action against platforms facilitating these prohibited practices.
Written by — Athi Venkatesh
