The Anti-Money Laundering 2^nd Annual Summit 2012 will be held on November , 2012 at Mumbai. This conference is aimed at providing an exclusive forum or policy level debate on various aspects of anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing within the entire financial services industry. With the increasing number and seriousness of money laundering acts, there is a pressing need for heightened and sustained awareness and action regarding anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing amongst various reporting entities. For updated agenda and to register for this event please visit the following link:http://www.fintelekt.com/anti-money-laundering-2nd-annual-summit-2012

India's 1^st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs presents Pharma Legal & Compliance Summit 2012 which aims to provide all stakeholders in the pharma industry verticals, including senior management, their general counsel, internal as well as external an opportunity to - share thoughts and experiences, discuss and analyze about a wide range of important issues affecting the industry on governance, ethics, compliance, contracts management, licensing agreements and developing a proactive legal strategy for patent litigations. www.plcs2012.com

Lex Witness - India's 1^st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs presents Media, Advertising & Entertainment Legal Summit MAELS 2012 which aims to provide all stakeholders in the media, advertising, media as well as entertainment industry verticals, including senior management, their general counsel, internal as well as external an opportunity to - share thoughts and experiences, discuss and analyze about a wide range of issues in today’s ever-changing media environment. It would cover all facets like impact of copyright amendment on business, issues related to convergence of technologies, legal complications, inconsistent, ambiguous and insufficiently tailored contracts, understanding the current and future Regulatory, Compliance & Policy Frameworks etc. www.maels2012.com

The Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, Delhi (India) will be hosting the IX^th K.K. Luthra Memorial Moot Court, 2013 to be held in the 3^rd weekend of January 2013 i.e. between 18^th and 20^th January 2013. The K.K. Luthra Memorial Moot Court is the only Moot Court held exclusively on Criminal Law in India. The Moot Court was last held between 20^th and 22^nd January, 2012 when 62 teams from top Indian and Overseas Universities had participated. This International Moot Court is held in the memory of late Mr. K.K. Luthra, Senior Advocate, who was a renowned criminal lawyer.

The Inaugural function will be held on the 18^th of January, 2013 at the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, Delhi (India) and registration of teams will take place immediately prior to that on the same day. The preliminary, pre-quarter final (discretion of the organizers) and quarter-final rounds will be held on the 19^th of January, 2013 at the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, Delhi (India). The semi-final and final rounds will be held on the 20^th of January, 2013 followed by the Prize Distribution at The India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi (India). The Moot Problem along with the Schedule are on the website. The Rules will be put up shortly on the website. In the event of any queries, you are welcome to email us at info@kkluthramoot.org or kkluthramootcourt@gmail.com (the website www.kkluthramoot.org).

Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff & Co. (AMSS), India’s leading and largest law firm has been adjudged the Indian Law Firm of the Year 2012, for the 7th consecutive year in the Who’s Who Legal Awards 2012. This recognition came as a result of six-month long research process that encompassed feedback from private practitioners, clients, competitors and other experts in the sector. Amarchand, with the highest scoring lawyers, according to the independent international research criteria, earned international acclaim for the outstanding performance and its expertise in various practice areas. Lawyers from the firm were listed more times than those from any other firm in the country. These accolades reinforce the firm’s self confidence about future opportunities and the quality of its internal bench strength in its focused journey towards achieving the key objective of becoming a 1000 lawyer firm by its 100th anniversary in 2017.

Currently, the firm has over 550 lawyers including Partnership strength of 68 Partners offering legal services through its offices in Mumbai, New Delhi, Bengaluru, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Chennai, and Ahmedabad. Ranked No. 1 legal advisor in Bloomberg, Mergermarket and Venture Intelligence M&A league tables for Q1, the firm has secured a promising beginning of the year. AMSS has recently been adjudged the Indian Deal Firm of the Year 2012 by ALB; Best Law firm of the Year by Legal Era Magazine; Best Overall Law Firm 2011 for the 3^rd consecutive year & India Law Firm of the Year in 12 practice areas by IBLJ and the National Law Firm of the Year in the IFLR Asialaw awards 2012. (Source: Amarchand Mangaldas)

America’s men clothing chain Brooks Brothers Group Inc. “BBG” has entered into a joint venture agreement with Reliance Brands “RBL”, a unit of Reliance Industries Limited thereby making its entry into the Indian fashion retail sector. Fox Mandal Delhi advised BBG with a team lead by Partner and Head-Corporate Sudish Sharma along with Senior Associate Sonia Abrol and Associate Devesh Pandey.

Sudish Sharma said "With BBG’s expertise in premium men’s clothing and Reliance’s track record with other premium brands, the transaction, which involved 15 long months of talks and negotiations with respect to structuring of various retail sector issues especially in the wake of the Indian government paving the way for 100% FDI in the single brand retails sector is one of the most unique joint ventures of the fashion industry in recent times." Fox Mandal advised BBG on Indian law and regulatory framework, structured the transaction for the company and also drafted all the transaction documents to conclude the deal. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, BBG will hold 51% in the new entity while the remaining stake will be held by RBL. For BBG the deal comes after 8 years of operations in China and for RIL this deal would mark the start of its fifth joint venture in the fashion space. (Source: Fox Mandal)

Majmudar & Partners represented AutoSonics (India) Private Limited, a leading India-based marketing and distribution company with a significant reach across the Indian subcontinent, in establishing its joint venture with Blaupunkt Holding GmbH, a German car infotainment major. Majmudar & Partners assisted in drafting the transaction documents and closing of the transaction. The partner who led the advice was Rukshad Davar. The transaction was closed in the first week of May 2012. (Source: Majmudar & Partners)

In the exercise of powers granted to the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 the CG has published a list of international non-proprietary names and has stated that the same cannot be registered as trademark under the Act. The CG has issued a list of 8151 names as INNs, which is available here http://www.ipindia.nic.in/list_INN_08February2012.pdf. With a list of INNs being notified by the CG, any names which are identical or deceptively similar to those on the INN list will not be registered as a pharmaceutical trademark. (Source: Nishith Desai Associates)

On March 19, 2012 the Central Government has now notified People’s Republic of China (including Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China) as a Convention Country. An award is regarded as a foreign award in India only if it origins from one of such territories as the Central Government, being satisfied that reciprocal provisions made may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be territories to which the New York Convention and Geneva Convention applies. Only such foreign awards are enforceable under the statutory framework for the enforcement in India. In the case of Bhatia International v Bulk Trading, the Supreme Court held that an arbitration award not made in a convention country will not be considered a foreign award. Thus, even if a country is a signatory to the New York Convention or Geneva Convention, it does not ipso facto mean that an award passed in such country would be enforceable in India. (Source: Nishith Desai Associates)

Transfer of a capital asset from a parent company (including a foreign parent company) to its Indian wholly owned subsidiary is not treated as a taxable transfer as per section 47(iv) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, such transfers are exempt from capital gains tax in India. However, the Authority for Advance Ruling, in its recent ruling (AAR No. 1067 of 2011), denied the benefit of the above exemption in a transaction involving buy-back of shares by an Indian subsidiary from its parent company i.e. RST which held 100% shares of the Indian subsidiary, directly, and through its nominees. (Source: Nishith Desai Associates)

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the strip search of a New Jersey man arrested on a warrant for a minor offense. The defendant, Albert Florence, was stopped for speeding in March 2005 and arrested on an outstanding warrant for unpaid traffic fines. The warrant was in error; Florence had paid the fines. His lawyer had argued searches at two detention centers violated the Fourth Amendment, since the arrest was for a minor crime and there was no reasonable suspicion for the search. The court ruled for detention officials in a 5-4 opinion.

The searches, which did not involve touching by jail officials, “struck a reasonable balance between inmate privacy and the needs of the institutions,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority. It would be difficult for detention officials to classify detainees based on their offenses because so little is known about them, Kennedy said. Arrestees may give a fake identity, and criminal records may be inaccurate or incomplete. Kennedy said the court was not ruling on searches in which a detainee is held separate from the population, cases of intentional humiliation, or cases involving touching of detainees. Justice Clarence Thomas did not join that section of Kennedy's opinion. That section was apparently important to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr., however. They wrote separate concurrences emphasizing that different cases could have different outcomes.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer dissented in an opinion joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. “A strip search that involves a stranger peering without consent at a naked individual, and in particular at the most private portions of that person’s body, is a serious invasion of privacy,” Breyer wrote. In his view, a strip search for a minor offense—such as traffic or regulatory offenses or a misdemeanor—violates the Fourth Amendment, unless the offense involves drugs or violence, or there is a reasonable suspicion the person has drugs or contraband. (Source: American Bar Association)