Conduct of litigation - Mazur case
Our Law and Practice Committee, in conjunction with CIPA, has prepared a note following the recent decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys.
You may be aware of the High Court’s recent decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341. Click here to read the judgment on BAILII
The decision reaffirms the current legal framework under the Legal Services Act 2007 that litigation is a reserved legal activity which only an authorised person or an exempt person under the Act may conduct. Criminal sanctions may be imposed for breaches of the Act’s provisions.
The judgment makes clear that neither employment by an authorised entity nor supervision by an authorised person confers any legal entitlement to conduct litigation. It is not permissible for a person who is not authorised to conduct litigation on the basis that i. they are employed by an authorised firm or other entity, or ii. that they are conducting litigation under the supervision of an authorised person.
It is, however, permissible for an unauthorised person to support an authorised person in the conduct of litigation.
The judgment has caused concern by having exposed a significant misunderstanding of who has the right to conduct litigation particularly in high volume practices. It is understood that the Legal Service Board and the relevant regulators are conducting an urgent review. CIPA and CITMA will be monitoring this review and engaging where appropriate to do so.
It is unlikely that the clarification provided by Mazur has any particular significance for CIPA and CITMA members. However, members involved in litigation should be cognizant of Mazur and the guidance it provides.