The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speachlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has prompted law firms to take a closer look at how litigation work is delegated and supervised. The ruling clarifies that only authorised individuals may conduct litigation, a reserved legal activity under the Legal Services Act 2007, and that supervision alone does not legitimise unauthorised conduct.

For firms that rely on non-qualified fee earners or administrative staff to progress cases, this represents a significant operational and compliance challenge. The Mazur ruling calls for stronger systems, clearer delegation frameworks, and documented supervision processes.

Legal Practice Support (LPS) works with firms to create and implement such systems, ensuring litigation tasks are handled efficiently and lawfully.

The Challenge for Law Firms After Mazur

The Mazur judgment exposed a critical vulnerability in many law firms’ operational structures. For years, practices have depended on non-qualified staff, such as paralegals, trainees, and administrative personnel, to assist with litigation tasks under the oversight of solicitors.

However, the High Court has now confirmed that employment within an authorised firm does not extend authorisation to the employee. This means that if a non-qualified individual issues proceedings, signs statements of truth, or communicates directly with the court, those actions may amount to unlawful conduct of litigation.

The implications are serious:

• Regulatory risk under the Legal Services Act 2007.
• Potential invalidity of document or proceedings handled by unauthorised staff.
• Costs recovery challenges, as opponents may argue that unlawfully conducted work is non-recoverable.

This judgement has highlighted the urgent need for firms to review how tasks are delegated and supervised, not only to maintain compliance but also to safeguard operational integrity and client confidence.

Why Systems and Supervision Matter More Than Ever

Effective delegation now requires more than verbal oversight or informal management. Firms must be able to demonstrate, with evidence, that only authorised persons conduct reserved legal activities, while support staff operate within clearly defined parameters.

Key elements include:

• Task mapping: Clearly defining which litigation activities are reserved and who is authorised to perform them.
• Supervision records: Documenting approvals, file reviews, and sign-offs.
• Audit trails: Maintaining visibility over task ownership within case management systems.
• Training: Ensuring all staff understand the legal boundaries established by the Mazur ruling.

The court’s distinction between “conducting” and “supporting” litigation makes these processes essential. In practice, this means using robust case management frameworks where each step of litigation can be tracked, authorised, and justified.

Turning Compliance into Operational Strength

While Mazur introduces compliance pressure, it also provides an opportunity for firms to strengthen their operational structure. Firms that take a proactive approach can transform compliance obligations into measurable efficiency gains.

Legal Practice Support works with firms to design and implement systems that:

• Reduce duplication of effort and supervision overhead.
• Ensure that only authorised fee earners handle reserved activities.
• Maintain transparency and accountability across litigation workflows.
• Support consistent quality and regulatory compliance in every case.

By integrating compliance with practical process design, firms not only reduce regulatory risk but also improve overall case management performance.

How Legal Practice Support Can Help

At Legal Practice Support, we specialise in helping law firms build systems and processes that align with both regulatory requirements and commercial realities.

In light of the Mazur ruling, our support includes:

• Compliance and process audits: Reviewing current delegation models to identify where unauthorised conduct may occur and recommending corrective measures.
• System optimisation: Enhancing case management and workflow tools to document supervision and maintain compliance evidence.
• Training and Guidance: Educating fee earners and support staff on the distinction between conducting and supporting litigation.
• Operational Support: Providing ongoing assistance to maintain complaint, efficient, and transparent litigation processes.

By partnering with LPS, firms can ensure that their systems protect both their regulatory position and their profitability.

Contact Us Today to Find Out More

The Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys decision is a timely reminder that effective supervision and structured delegation are now essential for compliance and cost protection.

With the right systems in place, firms can demonstrate that all litigation work is carried out lawfully and efficiently, minimising exposure under the Legal Services Act 2007.

Legal Practice Support helps firms achieve this balance: combining operational insight with regulatory awareness to build stronger, safer, and more efficient litigation practices.

Contact Legal Practice Support at enquiries@legalpracticesupport.co.uktoday to discuss how we can help your firm implement robust systems that comply with Mazur and enhance overall performance.