The High Court’s judgment handed down in Julia Mazur and anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) is continuing to cause questions across the profession. This is a significant case concerning the right to conduct litigation under the Legal Services Act 2007.  Note, this judgment relates only to litigation, not to other reserved activities.

This case was a debt claim, brought in the County Court, which then went to the High Court on appeal on the issue as to whether a non-authorised person could conduct litigation under the supervision of a qualified solicitor. Interestingly, the matter arises from an unpaid debt for legal work; the firm instructed to recover the debt’s “Head of Commercial Litigation” signed the Claim Form and Particulars. The Respondent contested the matter on the basis of whether he held a “current practising certificate”.

As part of the appeal, both The Solicitors Regulation Authority and The Law Society were invited by the High Court to make submissions.

The court held that “unqualified staff are permitted to support an authorised person in the conduct of litigation but not conduct it themselves”. This means that practice rights are required to conduct litigation. It is not enough to simply be supervised by an authorised person.

The Law Society says “we consider there is now a need for further guidance and we are liaising with the SRA for that purpose… take independent legal advice if you have doubts as to whether your practices fall on the right side of the line.”

In particular, there is a concern that work may have been carried out - in good faith - by legal executives who might be qualified but not have practice rights. CILEX, the regulator for Legal Executives has said “At CRL, our current focus has been on the implications of the Mazur Judgment. In our role as a regulator, we are actively working to address some of the challenges faced by Chartered Legal Executives as a result of the judgment that are appropriate for us to do. So far, we have:

• Issued and updated interim guidance on the conduct of litigation Litigation and supervision – Interim guidance – CILEx Regulation.
• Updated our FAQs based on the questions we have been receiving Conduct of Litigation FAQs
• Submitted an application to the LSB to allow standalone litigation practice rights.

So far as business owners are concerned, this may mean conducting a review of any matters currently involved with litigation. Law firms will want to ensure that practices involving conduct and supervision comply with this current position. In particular, an urgent consideration of who is “conducting” litigation and who else works on the matter, what they do and the nature of the supervision should be carried out. 

If you have any queries please email Nick Benson at nbenson@ortolan.com