Law Firm Inks $852 Million Outsourcing Deal

Legal process outsourcing (LPO) company Integreon has entered into what it describes in a press release as the largest legal outsourcing deal ever, worth $852 million over 10 years, with British law firm CMS Cameron McKenna.

The work covered by the agreement — nonbillable support tasks such as accounting, human resources, marketing, training and information technology — does not affect lawyers directly.

According to the U.K. publication Legal Week, that means current law firm jobs won’t necessarily be shipped overseas. Instead, CMS employees whose “middle office” duties are covered by the deal will continue with their jobs but will start drawing a paycheck from Integreon rather than from the law firm.

CMS managing partner Duncan Weston told Legal Week, “We are not anticipating any redundancies at the moment. We want this to be seen as something which will be positive for the career development of our business support staff with the opportunities that they will have at Integreon.”

The deal is not the first of its kind for Los Angeles-based Integreon, but it is the largest, according to the company. Integreon, which maintains outsourcing centers in India as well as in the Philippines and South Africa, has previously handled support services for Clifford Chance and DLA Piper.

One notable aspect of Integreon’s agreement with CMS Cameron is the openness about the price tag. Most firms that turn to LPOs for discovery and other legal work ask not to be identified, much less have the value of their contracts disclosed. Thus, while rough estimates of the potential multibillion-dollar market for legal outsourcing have been bandied about for several years, the true scale of the industry has so far been hard to capture. That may be changing.

via Law Firm Inks $852 Million Outsourcing Deal.

Compliance comes calling | The Economic Times

Take an Indian conglomerate preparing to acquire a Belgian company. The last thing it needs to worry about is US criminal laws, right? Wrong — and indeed, buying the Belgian concern without thoroughly analysing its compliance profile could mean buying tens of millions of dollars in criminal liability.

The compliance challenges posed by the vigorous pursuit by the US of alleged Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) transgressors have been compounded as other countries, most prominently Germany and the UK, have adopted and begun active enforcement of anti-foreign corruption laws of their own.

On January 19, for example, the US unveiled 22 indictments of individuals, including UK citizen Pankesh Patel, as a result of an undercover operation with FBI agents posing as sales agents offering to corruptly facilitate foreign contracts. Patel and 20 other defendants were handcuffed in front of their peers right on the floor of a Las Vegas trade show.

In his allegedly corrupt pursuit of defence contracts in Africa, Patel had meetings within the US, and sent paperwork in furtherance of the underlying scheme to the US. His indictment is an application of FCPA provisions catching foreign persons that take steps within the US to further overseas corruption.

For Indian companies that are issuers of US securities , no such actions within the US would even be required.

For our hypothetical Belgian marketing company, though not directly subject to the FCPA, it might have FCPA liability if it had corruptly carried out business operations for US companies, or sent dollar-denominated wire transfers for corrupt purposes.

Another trend worth noting for non-US companies is the expectation of active supervision on the part of senior corporate executives.

US enforcers have held executives at headquarters responsible for misconduct occurring in the field, on the basis that the executives failed to supervise far-flung personnel or failed to design internal controls to prevent misconduct.

Other countries are also raising the bar to prevent bribery. In part, this is due to diplomatic pressure from the US but also the efforts of the OECD and the UN, both of whom have sponsored conventions that are now in place mandating that their signatories take certain actions in the fight against corruption. India is party to the UN convention.

The Siemens case in which it paid a record settlement of $800 million in fines and disgorgement of profits was mirrored by a fine of equal magnitude paid to the German regulator.

via Compliance comes calling-Opinion-The Economic Times.

‘Aerospace, defence face hurdles in globalising’

With global aerospace and defence (A&D) majors positioning themselves to fulfil expected defence offsets obligations through partnerships with Indian A&D companies, consultancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) has released a report that examines the opportunities and pitfalls in this globalising sector.

The defence offset obligation that global A&D corporations must meet in India require foreign vendors who sign contracts worth more than Rs 300 crore for supplying defence equipment to India to source from Indian companies at least 30 per cent of the value of the contract. India’s current levels of defence spending could generate offsets worth Rs 15,000 crore annually.

The PwC report starts by establishing that the A&D sector is highly global in terms of sales, but only partially globalised from the viewpoint of supplies. For example, Canadian aerospace major Bombardier has customers in over 100 countries; but components and materials are sourced from just 40 countries.

The PwC report stipulates that an industry can be considered to be rapidly globalising when it meets three conditions. Firstly, when a high percentage of the total industry trade consists of import/export. A second qualifier would be established international supply chains based upon offshore production; and, thirdly, when crucial technology/R&D units are spread across the globe.

via ‘Aerospace, defence face hurdles in globalising’.

4 Firms Nab Roles on London’s Largest IPO in 3 Years | The American Lawyer

Essar Energy, a subsidiary of Indian conglomerate Essar Group, has set a price range for its planned $2.5 billion London IPO, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal. The listing is reportedly the largest on the London exchange in nearly three years.

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Linklaters, and Indian firms Amarchand & Mangaldas and Talwar Thakore & Associates are lead counsel on the offering, according to Indian legal publication Bar & Bench.

Essar Energy, owned by Indian billionaires Shashi and Ravi Ruia, will float approximately 20 to 25 percent of its shares as part of the offering. Bloomberg reports the funds from the IPO will help the integrated oil and gas unit of Mumbai-based Essar Group expand its power generation and energy exploration operations overseas.

Freshfields corporate partners Stuart Grider and Neil Radford are advising Essar Energy. The company has turned to Amarchand as local counsel in India. Radford previously advised metal and mining group Vedanta Resources, the first Indian company to go public in the U.K., when it raised $876 million in 2003. (Amarchand also advised Vedanta on that offering.)

via 4 Firms Nab Roles on London’s Largest IPO in 3 Years.

The Triumph of the Ordinary Cellphone – NYTimes.com

Forgotten in the American tumult is a global flowering of innovation on the simple cellphone. From Brazil to India to South Korea and even Afghanistan, people are seeking work via text message; borrowing and lending money and receiving salaries on cellphones; employing their phones variously as flashlights, televisions and radios.

And many do all this for peanuts. In India, Reliance Communications sells handsets for less than $25, with 1-cent-a-minute phone calls across India and 1-cent text messages and no monthly charge — while earning fat profits. Compare that with iPad buyers in the United States, who pay $499 for the basic version, who might also have a $1,000-plus computer and a $100-plus smartphone, and who could pay $100 or more each month to connect these many devices to the ether.

Not for the first time, the United States and much of the world are moving in different ways. American innovators, building for an ever-expanding bandwidth network, are heading toward fancier, costlier, more network-hungry and status-giving devices; meanwhile, their counterparts in developing nations are innovating to find ever more uses for cheap, basic cellphones.

The United States does not share the romance of the phone that prevails elsewhere — even in wealthy Europe. Since returning last year from India, I have been struck by how often calls drop here and surprised that text-messaging, so vital to Indians, has yet to entrench itself in the United States, where so much messaging travels on the Internet.

A recent report by the World Economic Forum and Insead, the French business school, concluded that the United States ranks below 71 other nations in its level of cellphone penetration, even though it leads in other areas of connectivity. Some Americans are not connected at all. But millions of others are beyond the phone, so to speak: they own one; they use it; but they own other devices, too, and the phone is not a be-all and end-all.

But it is from Kenya to Colombia to South Africa that cellphones are becoming the truly universal technology. They are the kind of places that have built cellphone towers precisely to leapfrog past the expense of building wired networks that have linked Americans for a century.

via Currents – The Triumph of the Ordinary Cellphone – NYTimes.com.

LPO (Legal Process Outsourcing) and Document Review | Ezinearticles

Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) is an industry that has been growing rapidly in the recent year and involves outsourcing of legal works by the legal communities of the developed countries like the US to lower wage developing countries like India.

LPO usually involves processes like Legal Research, Document Drafting, legal contracts, agreements, client letters, patent applications and various other Intellectual Property research and Paralegal Services.

LPO is increasingly being preferred these days because it has become a time consuming and expensive process, mainly triggered by data explosion, technological evolution, and the sudden increase in electronic stored information. One cannot also deny the fact that US practices lack consistent teams to perform document review work.

Document review in the context of litigation is done in two levels. The first level of document review is the discovery phase and first part in any litigation. This process is performed after receiving the legal “request for production of documents”. During this process the objective is to reduce the document set into a workable and responsive data set. Even though the e-discovery best practices have reduced a data set by almost 70% there still may remain millions of documents to be reviewed. This is because the total quantity of documents has multiplied several times over the years. In the second level these workable documents are reviewed more seriously by seniors.

As legal document review forms the major part of litigation expenses today law firms are trying out all methods to reduce the cost of litigation and outsourcing of e-discovery is a viable solution. During the document review process quite often millions of documents have to be searched and identified for

  • Case relevance
  • Confidentiality
  • Privileged /protection
  • “key or “hot” status

Besides in litigation, document review is also performed in matters of regulatory compliance and corporate due diligence.

via LPO (Legal Process Outsourcing) and Document Review.

Courts Weigh Whether Vatican Controls Bishops : NPR

At the heart of two lawsuits that are working their way through the federal courts lies one question: Does the Vatican control its Catholic bishops?

The answer could determine whether the Vatican can be sued in U.S. courts and be forced to open up its secret archives.

A Decentralized Church?

The Vatican’s relationship with its bishops surfaced again this week in the case of the Rev. Joseph Jeyapaul, an Indian priest who served in northern Minnesota in 2004 and 2005. After the priest returned to India, two teenage girls from Minnesota accused him of molesting them. Now the local prosecutor wants him back in the U.S. to face charges.

According to documents and interviews, the Vatican wrote Jeyapaul’s bishop in India and asked that “Father Jeyapaul’s priestly life be monitored so that he does not constitute a risk to minors and does not create a scandal.”

Mike Finnegan, the attorney for one of the young women, says Jeyapaul is now overseeing 40 schools in the diocese. He says the Vatican should have removed him from ministry.

“Pope Benedict has absolute power and control over that bishop in India,” Finnegan says. “And if Pope Benedict wanted something done and told this bishop to do it, the bishop would absolutely have to do it.”

But Vatican lawyer Jeffrey Lena says the church cooperated with U.S. authorities, supplying them with Jeyapaul’s address so that they could try to extradite him. He adds that people do not realize how administratively decentralized the Catholic Church is.

“The pope is not a five-star general ordering troops around,” Lena says. “He is not Louis XIV telling his minions what to do. The 'military command center' or 'absolute authority' models of the church in which Rome dictates orders by royal fiat is just wrong.”

via Courts Weigh Whether Vatican Controls Bishops : NPR.

Data Stolen From India, UN, Dalai Lama Traced To China — InformationWeek

Just as in January, computer hackers based in China are being accused of cyber espionage and the Chinese government is denying involvement and calling the charges groundless.

In January, the targets were Google, dozens of other companies, and the e-mail accounts of human rights activists. Following revelations about the incident, Google said it would stop censoring search results in China, a decision that led the company recently to redirect queries from mainland China to Google servers in Hong Kong.

This time, the targets are the Indian Ministry of Defense, the United Nations, and the Office of the Dalai Lama, among other organizations.

There's a noteworthy difference in the two attacks, however: The security experts who revealed the attacks managed to track the perpetrators over eight months.

As a consequence, the researchers were able to obtain copies of various sensitive and classified documents from the hackers. These documents included files taken from governments, businesses, academic institutions and other entities.

Some of the stolen data consisted of visa applications provided to Indian embassies, for example. Other data recovered included some 1,500 letters sent from the Dalai Lama's office between January 2009 and November 2009.

The researchers said they handled the sensitive files responsibly and notified affected organizations.

The report on the attack, published by Information Warfare Monitor — made up of Citizen Lab, part of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto, and the SecDev Group — and the Shadowserver Foundation, is called Shadows in the Cloud: An investigation into Cyber Espionage 2.0.

The authors of the report contributed to a similar investigation last year called GhostNet that found circumstantial evidence pointing to attackers located in China.

via Data Stolen From India, UN, Dalai Lama Traced To China — InformationWeek.

Is Your LPO Partner Breaking the Law? | eDiscovery Journal

The 2009 economic downturn created a boom in the offshore review industry. The cost of review still dominates the eDiscovery lifecycle and is the top target for budget-conscious corporate legal departments. Corporate counsel tends to start with the actual hourly wages of reviewers because that does not change their current workflow. Some work with pools of contract attorneys to bring the hourly rates down to $25-$80 per hour. But this still requires outside or inside counsel to manage the review and invest in the review platform to host the data. Outsourced service providers have traditionally handled the large, multiparty matters and supplied both project management as well as offshore contract reviewers. This is the root of the new Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) service model. Integreon, one of the largest LPO players, announced that it had been named in a writ for unlicensed practice of law to the Madras High Court in India.

The root issue seems to be a culture clash between the ‘Noble Profession’ that India advocates aspire to and the harsh economic reality of global law firms as multinational business entities. The writ from the Association of Indian Lawyers accuses the firms of using the LPOs to effectively practice law in India without being enrolled as advocates as required by law. There are monetary arguments and issues, but the Association seems to care more about the territorial intrusion as well as the way that the LPO’s have commoditized legal services. They even go so far as to level charges of immigration law violations due to the practice of using tourist visas for associates and visiting counsel.

via Is Your LPO Partner Breaking the Law? | eDiscovery Journal.

Google’s Nexus One Trademark Application Rejected | Techtree.com

It was with much fanfare that Google launched its phone, the “Nexus One” back in January. However, what was not known back then was that a small company known as Integra Telecom based in Oregon, U.S. owns the trademark for the word “Nexus”.

It makes roughly $60 million a year off the Nexus trademark. Google, who had applied for ownership of the “Nexus One” trademark, has seen its application rejected. According to the USPTO, the cause was probably “a likelihood of confusion.” A Google official has, however, confirmed that they will continue to claim the rights to the Nexus One trademark in U.S., and plan to respond to the office action from the U.S. Patent Trademark Office

via Techtree.com India > News > Consumer Electronics > Google’s Nexus One Trademark Application Rejected.