MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The Revised Law Society Guidance on Mazur was looked at in a previous post. Whilst we wait for the SRA Guidance it may be useful to look at the key differences in the Law Society Guidance before and after the…
MAZUR MATTERS 60: THE REVISED LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE NOTE: SOME KEY POINTS: THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSER OVERSIGHT OF THE WORK BEING DONE
One remarkable aspect of the Mazur decision is that in a very real sense it is the losers of the case who get to decide what goes on going forward. The Court of Appeal rejected the submissions of the Law Society…
MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
If you could not attend the webinar on the practical implications of the Court of Appeal decision in Mazur yesterday it is now available “on demand”. The Mazur decision confirms that authorised individuals may delegate tasks within the conduct of…
USEFUL CHECKLISTS TO HELP ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH MAZUR: PART OF THE MATERIALS PROVIDED WITH THE WEBINAR ON THE 9th APRIL
The webinar on Thursday provides a wealth of material in relation to compliance with the Court of Appeal guidance as to the conduct of litigation after the Court of Appeal decision in Mazur. In addition there is a series of…
MAZUR MATTERS 58: LEARN HOW TO SUPERVISE STAFF PROPERLY – OR RISK GOING TO JAIL: IT IS WISE TO RECORD SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS FULLY
One key element of the Mazur decision, that needs repeating, is that it does not allow unauthorised persons to “conduct” litigation. It allows unauthorised people to assist and conduct the tasks involved in litigation so long as they are properly…
MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER’S VIEW: “DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?”: “I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J’S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)”
I have written several times that when it came to providing practical guidance on how to deal with the Mazur judgment it was often insurers that were far more helpful than the regulators. It is worthwhile having a look at…
MAZUR MATTERS 55: THINGS WE DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (2): WHAT DEGREE OF SUPERVISION IS REQUIRED: THIS “WILL ALWAYS DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES”
It is important to note that the Court of Appeal decision yesterday did not create a “free for all” for unauthorised persons to undertake the conduct of litigation. Far from it. A central part of the judgment was the need…
MAZUR MATTERS 54: THINGS WE STILL DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (1) WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? THE COURT DID NOT SUPPLY AN “EXHAUSTIVE DEFINITION”
The judgment given yesterday still leaves us with many uncertainties and litigators still need to tread with some care. Here we look at one of the matters that the Court of Appeal was not able to give a definitive answer…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE “NUANCED” BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS…)
I have already written that the judgement is Mazur is far more nuanced than many commentators have suggested. It does not give a “free for all” for non-authorised persons to litigate. Rather it gives authorised lawyers the ability to delegate…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE “MAGNIFICENT SEVEN”
We continue our look at the judgment today by looking at the court’s more detailed consideration of what was meant by the “conduct of litigation”. The court did not give a definition. However it did give seven key points as to…
MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS
I will be writing about this judgment throughout the day. The first posts will contain a summary of the views from the court. Later posts will analyse the position as a whole. This post contains a consideration of the carrying…
MAZUR MATTERS 53: JUDGE REFUSES TO GRANT A SPECIFIC OR GENERAL EXEMPTION TO AN EXPERIENCED LEGAL EXECUTIVE
One of the issues that has followed the Mazur decision arises from the fact that the statute gives the court a power to grant an exemption. Here the judge considered whether the power to grant an exemption should be granted…
MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING “LIVESTREAMED”: A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP continues today. There were (I am told) some 400 people watching remotely. This has not stopped a large number of people online putting forward (sometimes bizarre) theories as to…
MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH – YOU HAVE TO ASK…
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP begins at 2.00 today, it continues on Wednesday and Thursday. It is not being live streamed (To be fair I have been sent a link – the Court…
MAZUR MATTERS 49: NEWS FROM CILEX ON LITIGATION PRACTICE RIGHTS: THERE MAY BE A SLIGHT CHANGE OF STANCE BY CILEX
One matter I continue to celebrate is when CILEx members announce that they have been granted Litigation Rights. I know that there are major questions as to whether they are necessary. However in the interim it is most probably prudent…
MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”
The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies” from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…
MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: “THIS IS NOT RELEVANT”
Mazur has not featured in many reported cases. However it is mentioned in passing here. For the sake of completeness of the series I have included it. It is (I suspect not the first) where it appears to have been…
MAZUR MATTERS 45: COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON 24th FEBRUARY 2026
The Court of Appeal is to hear the appear in the Mazur decision on the 24th February. Here we re-visit the arguments that the Law Society and the SRA put forward at first instance. It will be interesting to see…
MAZUR MATTERS 44: THE SRA STATES IT WILL TREAT “SYMPATHETICALLY” SELF-REPORTED INCIDENCES BASED ON MISTAKEN INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
The SRA updated its guidance on “Mazur and conducting litigation” today. This includes its likely approach to reports of past errors. The SRA states that it will look on such issues “sympathetically”. After all practising lawyers were not the only…
MAZUR MATTERS 43: AN EXAMPLE WHERE SUPERVISION WAS FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE: ACTION BY THE SRA & A FINE OF £30,000
It would be interesting to know what (if any) percentage of the profession read the SRA document “Effective supervision – Guidance” published in November 2022. The Mazur issue was there in plain sight. There is only one practical example given in…
MAZUR MATTERS 42: CAN ANY GOOD COME OF ALL THIS? POSITIVE THINKING ABOUT DELEGATION AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: SOME USEFUL LINKS
The current situation is that large parts of the profession are waiting, with bated breath, for a Court of Appeal judgment as to whether the Mazur decision was right, in particular in relation to non-authorised employees having the “conduct” of litigation. …
MAZUR MATTERS 41: CILEX GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL THE MAZUR JUDGMENT: BUT WHEN WILL IT BE HEARD?
CILEX have been granted permission to appeal the Mazur judgment. The primary question for the profession now is (i) when will the appeal be heard; (ii) what do we do in the meantime? Mazur remaining good law. (I wish CILEX…
MAZUR MATTERS 40: “A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF REGULATORY FAILURE”: CHAIR OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL PULLS NO PUNCHES…
The chair of the Legal Services Panel has given his strong views about the regulatory failures that the Mazur judgment shows. With descriptions of “a study of regulatory incoherence”; “legal fiction”; “false assurance” and ” the fragmented, incoherent framework that…
MAZUR MATTERS 39: CILEX APPLIES TO APPEAL MAZUR DECISION
An announcement on the CILEX website today states that it is applying for permission to appeal the decision in Mazur. The argument will be that, the Law Society, The SRA and the High Court construed the Solicitors Act incorrectly. Watch…
MAZUR MATTERS 38: THE GUIDANCE FROM THE SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: “MAZUR AND CONDUCTING LITIGATION”
The SRA have a specific page which, in turn, provides links to SRA guidance and the Legal Services Act, itself. These are useful links. They include a link to the SRA submissions in the Mazur case itself. “The Legal…
MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS: NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY
The Law Society has earlier issued two new documents which are guides to Mazur. One is outside a paywall, the other is not. “Mazur – answering your questions” deals with many key issues. (Links are important on this topic -…
MAZUR MATTERS 36: UPDATED GUIDANCE FROM AN INSURER: THE NEW DUTIES ON THOSE WHO “SUPERVISE” – THEY NOW HAVE TO “CONDUCT”
Some of the most useful guidance on compliance and Mazur has come from insurers (perhaps unsurprisingly). It is significant that one of the major insurers has already updated and revised its guidance. This guidance is essential reading for anyone involved…
MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT “WITHOUT MORE”?
Here we are looking at case report which contains a reference to Mazur and appears to suggest that signature of an application by an unauthorised person means that the application is “liable to be struck out”. As it turns out…
TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED
Today I am writing directly from the Association of Costs Lawyers conference in London. Unsurprisingly the first two speakers considered Mazur. This is a highly abbreviated version of their talks. ANDREW ROY KC Andrew, kindly referring to this blog as…
MAZUR MATTERS 34: “LEGAL EXECUTIVES” AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE “HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED”? JIGSAW
We have, in the past few months, been addressing issues that arise from a statute passed some 18 years ago. The issues in relation to the obligation of solicitors and authorised persons (and only solicitors and authorised persons) to conduct litigation…
MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
We continue with our rare trip inside the Houses of Parliament by looking at the response that the Minister for Courts and Legal Services to the letter from the Chair of the Justice Committee. (We are seeing how Mazur…
MAZUR MATTERS 32: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (1): THE LETTER FROM THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE TO THE MINISTER
It is rare for there to be Parliamentary consideration of the matters discussed in this blog. Quite often we are trying to divine what it is that Parliament actually meant when it drafted a statute. In the Mazur case Parliament…
MAZUR MATTERS 31: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF “WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE” – AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?
The Legal Services Board has set out the scope of its review of “advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”. Stripped down to its basics the question being asked…
MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS: LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX’S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS
The Legal Services Board has today approved an application from CILEx Regulation to allow legal executives to obtain standalone litigation practice rights. Here we have the announcement and the Decision Notice. The finer detail will be considered when it becomes…
MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE
Here we are looking at another useful link. FOIL (the Federation of Insurance Lawyers) has produced a document dealing with the potential consequences of Mazur for its members. (FOIL has always been such a clever name. This link shows that…
MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 28: IT WAS “SLIGHTLY SURPRISING” THAT A PARALEGAL “DID NOT KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT APPLICABLE TO NON-SOLICITORS”
Here we look at a judge’s comments outside the ambit of litigation. Nevertheless it shows that the issue of professional regulation and the use of “non-authorised” employees within solicitor’s firms may well become a more important issue in the future….
MAZUR MATTERS 27: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: A USEFUL GUIDE FROM INSURERS: PLUS THE FIRST “REAL WORLD” CASE WHERE MAZUR HAS LED TO A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN COSTS
The commentary on Mazur continues. Here I want to look at two useful links. The first relates to guidance given by an insurer. The second relates to the first report (I have seen) on Mazur having an impact on costs….
MAZUR MATTERS 26: SHOULD THE PROFESSION HAVE SEEN THIS COMING? THERE WERE CLUES…: TODAY IS THE 18th ANNIVERSARY OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT 2007 COMING INTO FORCE: SHOULD WE HAVE BEEN SURPRISED?
The reason why we litigators are infinitely wise is that we always deal with things in retrospect. We have the perfect vision of hindsight. Litigation is full of “why did you do that?”, “If you say that now why didn’t…
MAZUR MATTERS 24: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” (5): THE MEANING OF “COURT” AND WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE NOT COVERED BY ACT
Here we continue with the examination of what is meant by the “conduct litigation” by looking at the Statute and Law Society Guidance as to the meaning of “court”. This extends to some, but not all, tribunals. (Some courts are…
MAZUR MATTERS 22: USEFUL LINKS: GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA (IN 2022) – WHICH SAID EXACTLY WHAT MAZUR SAID: A SITUATION HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT…
Here we look at guidance given by the SRA in November 2022. The one thing that the SRA can point to is the fact that this guidance said, in clear terms, precisely what was said in Mazur about who can…
MAZUR MATTERS 20: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION? PLUS A SNIPPET OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE
I am continuing with the Mazur series by looking at two more useful links from reputable sources. One, from the Bar Standards Board, on what is not the conduct of litigation the other the Law Society Practice Note on these…
MAZUR MATTERS 19: TWO USEFUL LINKS: THIS HAS CHANGED THE PROFESSION’S UNDERSTANDING NOT THE LAW: STEPS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE
I am attempting to avoid the blog being solely about Mazur. However the fact is that the Mazur issues are the most widely read posts, many of the more mainstream issues having taken a backseat. Whilst there is some commentary…
MAZUR MATTERS 18: WHAT DIFFERENCE WILL MAZUR MAKE TO THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS? HOW ABOUT – ABSOLUTELY NONE…
Much has been written about Mazur, this includes many “column inches” about the implications for inter parties and solicitor and own client costs. However there is some support for the proposition that the fact that an “unauthorised” litigator has not…
MAZUR MATTERS 17: WHAT ABOUT COST LAWYERS? RE-VISITING OLD GROUND: A CASE THAT MAKES USEFUL READING
There are a number of issues that have come up in relation to the impact of the Mazur decision. One of those relates to the activities of cost lawyers. The case law and principles relating to this were considered in…
MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ
I have gently, perhaps too gently, suggested that a great deal of what is being written and said about the impact of Mazur is “unhelpful”. Put more bluntly some of it is inaccurate and misleading. There is much “wishful thinking”…
MAZUR MATTERS 14: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”: A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR ON 31st OCTOBER 2025
As all readers of this blog will now by now The decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) means that solicitors must ensure that an “authorised person” has conduct of litigation. A failure to…
MAZUR MATTERS 13: WHAT IS MEAN BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 4: THE COURT SHOULD LOOK AT THE ENTIRETY OF ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN “IN THE ROUND”
The decision Mazur continues to attract considerable comment, for good reason. Here we consider the question of how the courts approach the issue. (13 may be lucky for some. Just remember the court considers the position “in the round”). …
MAZUR MATTERS 12: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 3: JUDGMENT ON WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION
We are continuing with the detailed look at the consequences of the Mazur case. Here we look at that part of a judgment where the court made clear findings as to what did not constitute the conduct of litigation. (Staying outside…
MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 2 (A) : WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS
Comment on the implications of the Mazur decision goes on unabated. Some of this is informed commentary, some it is definitely not. On this site we are going to continue the examination of the primary sources of assistance to litigators…
MAZUR RECORDING – NOW AVAILABLE
The webinar on Mazur I did last Friday is now available from Steve Cornforth who kindly arranged it. Details are below. (You can watch the recording on any screen you like – well nearly…) HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH…
You must be logged in to post a comment.