In a landmark decision today, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the intimate nature of legal advocacy, categorizing it as a contract of personal service rather than a contract for service. This crucial distinction delineates the unique bond between advocate and client, setting precedence for legal practice nationwide.
The bench, composed of Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, meticulously outlined the intricate dynamics inherent in the advocate-client relationship. Among these delineations were fiduciary obligations, emphasizing the advocate’s role as a trusted agent bound by the client’s directives.
Fundamentally, advocates were deemed as representatives of their clients, entrusted with substantial responsibilities and duty-bound to adhere to client instructions without imposing personal judgment.
The Court’s deliberation stemmed from a pivotal case concerning the applicability of the Consumer Protection Act to advocates. The ruling, informed by legal precedents including the seminal Dharangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. vs. State of Saurashtra case, underscored the client’s direct oversight over advocate conduct, exemplified by the legal instrument of the ‘Vakalatnama.’
Consequently, the Court concluded that legal advocacy, being intrinsically rooted in personal service, falls outside the purview of services under consumer protection laws. This verdict, as articulated by the Court, renders complaints alleging deficiency in legal services unenforceable under the Consumer Protection Act of 2019.
The breadth of legal representation was evident in the extensive counsel arrayed before the Court, representing diverse legal bodies and associations. Their presence underscored the significance of this ruling for the legal fraternity at large.
In closing, the Supreme Court’s ruling reaffirms the sanctity of the advocate-client relationship, recognizing legal advocacy as a deeply personal commitment beyond the realm of commercial transactions.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
