The High Court in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys may have fundamentally changed the way Law Firms will conduct litigation

In Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), the High Court ruled that Charles Russell Speechlys had misinterpreted the Legal Services Act in allowing trainee and unqualified staff to conduct litigation under the supervision of an authorised solicitor.

The court ruled:

"Both the Law Society and the SRA in their submissions to the Court distinguish between (a) supporting an authorised solicitor in conducting litigation and (b) conducting litigation under the supervision of an authorised solicitor. They contend that activities falling within (a) are permitted, but those falling within (b) are prohibited by the statutory regime. I agree with this analysis."

Following this judgment, Law Firms will no longer be able to offer clients the option of having a supervised legal executive or trainee solicitor conduct their matters, with lower associated costs. Inevitably, this will lead to the legal profession becoming even less accessible to those without the means to pay hundreds of pounds an hour for solicitors. However, the ruling also has obvious upsides, as it ensures that all litigation will be done through a qualified solicitor, and this may strengthen the efficiency and quality of litigation cases in coming years.