In Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2026] EWCA Civ 369, the Court of Appeal has provided clarity and relief to the legal profession by overturning the High Court's 2025 decision that an 'unauthorised person' (according to the Legal Services Act 2007) was 'carrying on the conduct of litigation' under that same Act.
The issue before the Court of Appeal
As Sir Colin Birss set out in the first paragraph of the Court of Appeal judgment, the case concerned the proper meaning of the words 'carry on the conduct of litigation' as they are used in the Legal Services Act 2007.
Were people working in a law firm or a law centre, who are not themselves authorised individuals under the Legal Services Act 2007 (therefore 'unauthorised persons'), carrying on the conduct of litigation if they do so under an authorised individual's supervision?
In the High Court, Sheldon J had heard from the SRA and the Law Society, and held that they were.
Implications of the High Court's decision
Given how many legal firms are run, and the amount of work delegated to unqualified individuals, this was a decision with a 'profound, deep and ongoing' impact according to one witness. There were also criminal offences to be considered.
Unsurprisingly the High Court judgment was appealed.
The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX), supported by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) and the Law Centres Network (LCN) all made submissions in support of the appeal.
The Court of Appeal's judgment
The Court of Appeal found that 'conduct of litigation' referred to the tasks to be undertaken. In contrast 'carry on' referred to the direction and control of those tasks.
Therefore, an unauthorised person was permitted to perform the tasks falling within the former, provided an authorised person retains responsibility for those tasks so delegated. The authorised person is thereby “carrying on” the conduct of litigation.
The High Court judge was wrong to distinguish between:
- supporting or assisting an authorised solicitor in conducting litigation, and
- conducting litigation under the supervision of an authorised solicitor.
What does the judgment mean for solicitors and law centres?
The Court of Appeal gave some guidance based on common ground between the parties and without providing an exhaustive definition. Therefore the following would almost certainly not be 'conducting litigation':
- Pre-litigation work
- Giving legal advice in connection with court proceedings
- Conducting correspondence with the opposing party on behalf of clients
- Gathering evidence
- Instructing and liaising with experts and counsel
- Signing a statement of truth in respect of a statement of case
- Signing any other document that the CPR permits to be signed be a legal representative.