Having spearheaded DLA Piper’s global Islamic finance practice and its Saudi office, Agha left that firm in October 2008 [with colleague Peter Hodgins, following management differences within the Saudi office] with a view to establishing his firm alongside noted Emirati figurehead Dr Saeed Mohammed Al-Shamsi. In only a few months the firm secured an affiliation with Pillsbury Winthrop, putting to rest any thoughts that a Shariah law firm is less appealing for international clientele.
Although Pillsbury is unlike Agha & Shamsi’s offering, using a conventional business model, Agha says there is no conflict of interest in aligning with a non-Shariah compliant firm. “This is simply an arrangement between two law firms who have affiliated on a non-exclusive basis, and when it makes sense we co-operate on matters,” Agha explained. “We don’t share systems, client bases, staff or resources.”
Inevitably, questions arise on how the firms work together – how Agha & Shamsi maintains its Shariah compliance working alongside its affiliate on a contentious and potentially ribawi (interest-bearing) matter?
“While the firm could not work on an interest-bearing transaction – for example the documentation of a conventional loan – if we’re working on a large project in the UAE or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that had a conventional finance tranche, then subject to review and approval of our board we may be able to work on the permissible parts of the project. We would have to be mindful, of course, not to share in any fees from the impermissible representation – this would need to be clearly marked and delineated so there’s no issue,” Agha said.
“The whole reason we’ve set up the firm is to take a position and endeavour to develop a genuine Islamic finance practice. It would be hypocritical if we were to set up an ownership structure with an international firm and have that kind of financial backing from them where we’d be able to enjoy the revenues that effectively came from interest-bearing transactions.”