Practising Law in India vs the West: A Reality Check

The institutional landscape

India’s legal system carries a proud common-law inheritance, yet its daily practice is defined by volume, diversity, and velocity. High caseloads, procedural adjournments, and infrastructural disparities shape advocacy as much as doctrine. The bar is resilient; improvisation is a professional skill.

From an ADR vantage point, the statutory architecture is robust with conciliation and arbitration under modernised frameworks, court-annexed mediation, and sectoral regulators encouraging negotiated outcomes. The challenge is not absence of law, but uneven uptake and enforcement culture across forums and states.

For women, entry barriers have lowered in numbers but not always in influence. Courtroom presence is strong; leadership pipelines are still maturing. The paradox: visibility without proportional authority.

The West (U.K./U.S. as reference points)

Western practice tends to emphasise docket discipline, time management, and early case management conferences. Discovery regimes, cost consequences, and judicial case control encourage settlement as a rational default rather than a last resort.

ADR is deeply institutionalised with professional mediation rosters, enforceable settlement protocols, and client expectations aligned to cost-benefit analysis. Women’s leadership representation, while imperfect, is structurally scaffolded through firm policies, mentorship tracks, and transparent evaluation metrics.

Procedure vs. culture: where the real differences live

Law on the books often converges; culture in action diverges.

• Adjournments vs. Timetables: Indian courts may tolerate flexibility born of necessity; Western courts tend to treat time as a justiciable resource. The lesson is not mimicry but calibrated discipline where predictability improves access to justice.
• Formality vs. Function: India retains a ceremonial cadence that dignifies process; Western forums foreground efficiency. Tradition and efficiency need not be adversaries; they can be co-counsel.
• Settlement Ethos: In the West, settlement is strategy. In India, it is still sometimes perceived as compromise. ADR reframes it as resolution with agency.

A woman’s experience at the table

• Voice and Authority: In India, women advocates often excel in preparation and client rapport, yet face subtle gatekeeping in high stakes commercial matters. Structured ADR settings like mediation caucuses and arbitral tribunals can neutralise status hierarchies by centring expertise and process.
• Work Design: Predictable scheduling and virtual hearings in Western practice have tangibly improved retention. India’s post-pandemic procedural innovations should be preserved not as concessions, but as competence tools.
• Leadership Pathways: Sponsorship, not merely mentorship, is the lever. Institutions that publish criteria for panel appointments and tribunal selection widen the corridor for merit to travel. 

Why ADR is India’s strategic bridge

As CEO of ADRODR India, I see ADR not as a parallel track but as the connective tissue between tradition and modernity.

• Legally grounded, culturally adaptable: Mediation respects relational contexts which are vital in family businesses, employment, and community disputes.
• Economically rational: Arbitration and mediation reduce transaction costs and reputational spillovers which are especially relevant in cross-border commerce.
• Gender-inclusive by design: Process control, confidentiality, and flexible formats make participation safer and more equitable. When procedure is humane, outcomes are durable.

Convergences worth embracing

• Early Neutral Evaluation: Encourage court-referred ENE to test merits before positions harden.
• Cost Consequences for Unreasonable Refusal to Mediate: A calibrated doctrine is firm but fair and can shift behaviour without coercion.
• Transparent Panel Appointments: Publish criteria for mediators and arbitrators; merit thrives in sunlight.
• Hybrid Hearings as Default Options: Efficiency is not a Western import; it is a universal virtue.

Closing reflection

The practice of law is a living tradition. India does not need to become the West to deliver timely justice; it needs to systematise what already works and dignify settlement as wisdom, not surrender. For women, the path forward is institutional design that rewards preparation, process mastery, and principled negotiation.

In ADR, we find a language both ancient and modern: listen first, define the issue precisely, and craft remedies that parties can live with. Justice, after all, is not only pronounced, it is performed.

Author: Pavani Sibal is the CEO of ADRODR India. The views expressed are personal.