Following the High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has now issued a formal statement, offering much-needed clarification for legal professionals and firms navigating the implications of the ruling.
SRA’s Key Message: No Change in Law and a timely reminder
The SRA confirms that the judgment does not alter the legal position. Instead, it reinforces the existing framework under the Legal Services Act 2007, which clearly states that only authorised individuals—such as solicitors—may conduct litigation, as it is a reserved legal activity [1].
Non-authorised individuals, including unqualified staff or contractors, may support litigation under appropriate supervision, but they cannot conduct litigation themselves, even within regulated entities.
The Boundary Between Conducting and Supporting
The SRA acknowledges that the line between “conducting” and “supporting” litigation is not always clear-cut and may depend on the specific facts of each case. Being employed or contracted by an authorised person does not automatically confer litigation rights on non-authorised individuals.
Their 2022 guidance on effective supervision remains the reference point, stating:
“People who are not themselves authorised to conduct litigation can only support authorised individuals to conduct litigation, rather than conducting litigation themselves under the supervision of an authorised individual.”
What Firms Should Do Now
The SRA advises firms to:
- Review supervision arrangements to ensure compliance with the Legal Services Act.
- Record decision-making around how litigation work is delegated and supervised.
- Contact the Professional Ethics helpline for support if needed.
The responsibility lies with firms to ensure that only authorised individuals are conducting litigation and that supervision is appropriately structured and documented.
A Step Toward Greater Clarity
This statement from the SRA provides reassurance that the regulatory framework remains unchanged, while also emphasizing the importance of compliance and clarity in day-to-day practice. It aligns with the Law Society’s earlier call for clearer guidance and collaboration between regulatory bodies[1].
As firms continue to assess their internal processes, this update should help reduce uncertainty and support informed decision-making.
References
[1] SRA Statement following the case of Julia Mazur & Ora v Charles Russell …