04 / 07 · Practice Area
Regulatory Defense & Investigations
Quiet resolutions where possible. Hard defense where required.
Pre-enforcement strategy, regulator engagement and a coordinated technical-legal narrative - for the matters where one wrong submission shapes the entire outcome. We represent enterprises and GCCs before sector regulators with multi-round written submissions, hearing representation, and a defensible record from first contact.
Who this is for
Who we built this practice for
This practice is built for the people who feel a regulatory matter on a personal docket, not just on a quarterly risk register. Boards and General Counsel facing scrutiny from a sector regulator come to us early, when the question is still whether to engage proactively or wait for a formal notice; that decision usually shapes the rest of the matter. Companies managing enforcement risk, whether around licensing, conduct, disclosure or data, use us to convert ambiguous regulator signals into a written strategy with named owners and defined off-ramps.
Organizations under active investigation, with document requests landing weekly and interviews on the calendar, rely on us to run the entire response under privilege, with a single chronology and a single voice to the regulator. Enterprises receiving a regulator notice, show-cause letter or call for information get a measured first response that protects optionality rather than locking in an admission. And corporate groups facing multi-regulator matters, where one set of facts is being scrutinized by two or three authorities in parallel, use us to keep submissions consistent across forums. In regulatory matters, timing and the shape of the first three communications usually outweigh everything that follows.
Scope
What this practice covers
Our work begins well before enforcement, where strategy is cheapest and optionality is widest, and follows the matter all the way through to resolution. From the moment you sense regulatory risk, we run a pre-enforcement assessment: what the regulator likely knows, what they likely care about, what your record will show, and what a defensible posture looks like before any communication leaves the building. Where voluntary disclosure is the right answer, we structure and time it; where it is not, we prepare for the engagement that is coming.
On live matters we draft and file multi-round written submissions, manage formal representations, and appear at hearings before the regulator. Internal investigations are run under privilege with a clear scope, document preservation protocol and interview plan, so the findings are useful to defense rather than discoverable against it. We align the technical and legal narrative deliberately: the engineering, product, finance or compliance team's account of what happened is harmonized with the legal characterization before either is committed to writing.
Around the core, we advise on settlement and consent term negotiation, draft undertakings, manage post-resolution reporting obligations, and coordinate with criminal counsel where parallel proceedings emerge. Where the matter touches multiple regulators (for example, a single incident attracting RBI, SEBI and CERT-In interest), we run a single coordinated strategy so the regulators are not reading three inconsistent versions of the same story.
Our Process
How the work moves
Step 01
Assessment
We map the regulator's likely position, your actual exposure on the underlying facts, the evidence already in writing, and the optionality you still have. This early read sets the strategic frame: cooperate, defend, disclose or wait, with a clear-eyed view of the trade-offs.
Step 02
Narrative and evidence build
We align the technical and legal account into a single chronology, run an internal investigation under privilege where one is needed, and lock down a document set that supports the position you are taking. This is the work that determines whether later submissions read as one story or three.
Step 03
Submissions and hearings
We draft and file multi-round written submissions, prepare witnesses, and appear at hearings before the regulator. Every communication is built to be consistent with every other, across submissions, across hearings, and across regulators where the matter is multi-jurisdictional.
Step 04
Resolution
We negotiate closure on terms that minimize exposure and, where possible, avoid public disclosure. Post-resolution undertakings, reporting obligations and remediation commitments are drafted to be operationally realistic, not just regulator-acceptable.
What you get
Outcomes you can plan against
You get a defensible legal record from day one, no privilege leakage, no admissions that harm you later, no internal email thread that becomes the central exhibit. Regulator matters resolve faster because the narrative has been built as the matter unfolded, not reverse-engineered after a show-cause letter lands. And you protect your reputation: many regulatory matters close without public disclosure if they are handled, from the first contact, by counsel who understand both the substance and the choreography.
By the numbers
Key facts
- Regulator investigations: 3-12 months typical resolution timeline.
- Pre-enforcement disclosure can reduce penalties by 25-40% (RBI/SEBI practice).
- Multi-regulator coordination required in 35%+ of complex matters.
- A defensible record reduces enforcement exposure by ~50%.
- Written submissions shape 70%+ of regulator outcomes before the hearing stage.
Frequently Asked
Common questions
When should we bring in counsel?
Immediately. The first submission to a regulator shapes the entire matter. Pre-enforcement strategy before any regulator contact is ideal.
Can you represent us in a regulator hearing?
Yes. We appear before sector regulators (RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, MeitY, CERT-In and others) on written and oral submissions.
How do you protect privilege during an investigation?
All work is done under attorney direction and marked attorney-client privileged. We manage document requests carefully.
How do you coordinate with our compliance team?
They handle technical and operational response; we build the legal narrative and regulator strategy in parallel.
Can you handle multi-regulator matters?
Yes. We coordinate the legal strategy across multiple regulators to avoid inconsistent submissions.
What does a defensible record look like?
Clear documentation of your investigation, decision-making, remediation, and controls - all marked privileged and managed by counsel.
How long does a typical matter take?
3-12 months, depending on complexity and regulator pace. We push for faster resolution without sacrificing strategy.
What happens if the regulator proposes enforcement action?
We negotiate settlement terms, draft any required undertakings, and manage post-resolution reporting.
Next Step
Discuss a regulatory matter confidentially.
A confidential conversation with our managing partner to scope the right approach.
Contact the Firm