This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
Having extensive experience in shipping, insurance, commodities, and international trade, can you walk us through the journey that led you to choose law as a career and to specialize in these areas?
My decision to study law was an unplanned act of desperation based on a two-minute argumentative interaction with women’s rights lawyer Flavia Agnes who visited KC college (where I was pursuing BSc – Statistics and Economics) to conduct a seminar on women’s rights. During the discussion, Flavia touched upon the topic of martial rape of wife by the husband. The impatient rebel in me promptly asked her whether the wife could be guilty of martial rape when the husband didn’t want to have sexual intercourse. This interaction with Flavia and her articulation stayed with me.
When I completed my Bsc – Statistics and Economics, I realised that as much as I enjoyed statistics as a subject, I was not good at it. pursuing it further would be a torture that I preferred to avoid. I had to tell my parents that I was pursuing higher studies to get them off my back!!!
Right next to KC College was KC Law College. I recollected my discussion with Flavia Agnes which I found intellectually refreshing. In an act of desperation (or a leap of faith) I decided to apply for admission at KC Law and secured my seat!!! That’s it. No research, no carrier prospects analysis, no guidance counsellor, never met a lawyer previously, neither saw a court room nor did I know how a court room looked, no idea what a solicitor/counsel meant!!! etc. I was the antithesis of what most prospective law students went through when they enrolled in law school and what most law students endure today!!!
To be honest, I did not choose to specialize in shipping and insurance law. Shipping law chose me. I would like to think that. During law school, I was eager for internships to gain experience. I was sending my CV wherever I could to secure an internship. I received a call from Crawford Bayley for an interview. I met the partner who asked me a few generic questions. He asked me to join the next day. While leaving his office, I asked him what law he practices. He said shipping. I said, cool!! I am doing shipping law now. That’s it. No grand plan or scheme was hatched. I stumbled into the field of shipping law!!
You have worked on admiralty cases across Indian courts. Could you share one of the most complex or interesting cases you have handled in the admiralty space?
There are so many. A case involving the Salgaocar Group and Goldgen Ocean Group involving ani-suit injunctions against English court proceedings, arrest of vessel in South Africa as security and eventual settlement on favour of the client.
Another case involving European creditors against a fleet of vessels controlled by Jaisu Shipping. This involved the arrest of their entire fleet in India, dealing with multiple creditors, challenging port claims, priority of claims and arriving at a resolution where my clients made a full recovery of their claims from the sale proceeds.
Allison incident with a chemical jetty where shipowners were straddled with inflated claims. This was one of those cases where you delve into root case analysis, construction path analysis, remoteness of damages, delay analysis, liability in tort, contract and statute. At the end of the journey, the owners were not held liable for any of the claims made by port authorities.
In your experience, how has the legal landscape surrounding maritime law in India evolved in recent years, particularly in terms of regulation, enforcement, and the role of the courts?
The biggest change in the legal landscape is the Admiralty Act, 2017. The Admiralty Act 2017 vested more high courts with admiralty jurisdiction. Previously, it was only the chartered high courts and their successor courts that were vested with admiralty jurisdiction. In terms of substantive legislation, regarding maritime claims and liens, we are following Arrest Convention, 1999 with some variations.
Could you share some of your experiences from the early years of your practice as an associate that helped shape your career? And, after almost five years of working with a law firm, what motivated you to establish your own practice? What were some of the key challenges you encountered in the initial stages?
Looking back, the early years in the profession were exciting, challenging and rewarding. Challenging in part – as I was argumentative, impatient, and blunt without due regard to the person I was dealing with. I was fortunate enough to have worked with Ananjan Mitter at ALMT Legal who encouraged me to soften the rough edges of my personality. His guidance helped me a long way in adjusting to the requirements of the profession. I am indebted to him. The biggest take away from those years – the profession is about people. Dealing with people in an honest, fair and respectable way goes a long way in getting things done.
Ananjan decided to pursue other interests and left the firm. I was at crossroads in terms of where I wanted to be. At that point, I did not see myself in the law firm architecture. I was securing decent amount of work through my contacts. In a leap of faith or madness, at the age of 29 in the year 2013, I set up my private practice under the banner – Sochannam Legal. I sought freedom and had a load of dreams. In return, I received a rewarding roller-coaster ride that I would not trade for the world!!!
The key challenge when setting up practice is migrating from just servicing a client to managing and servicing the client while keeping in mind the value for the services you are offering. It’s a 360-degree role. Private practice is not meant for everyone. Once you endure the practice for a few years, you get a hang of it.
How do you manage the complexities of different legal jurisdictions and international laws when handling maritime cases that involve multiple parties across borders?
Research, research and more research. Speaking with lawyers in other jurisdictions to understand how things work there. You start from a position of understanding what you do not know and then work towards finding answers to them.
When dealing with parties across multiple jurisdictions, it is always good to understand the culture they come from. Every culture is unique. Understanding another culture (without being judgmental!!) goes a long way in dealing effectively with clients and parties.
You have significant experience in handling arbitrations related to COA disputes, Off-hire disputes, charterparty disputes, and demurrage. What strategies do you find most effective when preparing for and managing arbitration proceedings in these areas?
- Get the facts right.
- Provide documentary proof for damages. Especially in cases of repudiatory breach of charterparty/COA. Depending on the market situation, these claims can go into millions of $$.
- There are many reasons for demurrage and dispatch claims. When your clients are relying on adverse weather to defeat demurrage claim, make sure there is adequate documentary proof to demonstrate adverse weather. Vanilla weather reports won’t do. The weather report will be unique to the location of the weather station. The moot point will be if the weather was prevailing at the port.
Given your experience in corporate structuring, particularly when advising companies looking to set up operations in India, what are the most critical legal considerations for international businesses entering the Indian market?
The critical issues are FEMA compliance and sectoral caps. Restrictions on foreign shareholders. Whether they intend to form a wholly owned subsidiary or form a Joint Venture company with a local partner. In which case, shareholding interest in the JV company plays a significant role. Assessing consequences of DTAA which may impact the operations in India and the global parent company. Repatriation of profits.
What advice would you give to a young lawyer starting out in the areas of shipping, insurance, and international trade law?
After a year/two into the practice, young lawyers should ask themselves if they really like this area of law. If they do not, they should be honest enough to admit it and be open to make changes to their career path. These days, a lot of aspiring lawyers at very early stage of their career set their agenda in the profession. This is good when there is clarity of thought. In most cases, it is based on insufficient information, and this is where people get stuck.
It serves no purpose to do something you do not like. In my case, I knew I was not good at statistics though I enjoyed it. I took a chance and decided to study law and got involved with shipping. The journey has been enriching and rewarding. More importantly, young lawyers should not lose themselves in over planning everything about their career. Work hard and allow things to happen. Be authentic and don’t be an imitation!!! be open to change!!!
Get in touch with Kaushik Sochannam-
