{"id":266507,"date":"2025-10-08T13:20:48","date_gmt":"2025-10-08T13:20:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dominiclevent.com\/blog\/?p=266507"},"modified":"2025-10-08T13:21:11","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T13:21:11","slug":"%f0%9f%a7%be-mazur-explained-litigation-just-got-pricier","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dominiclevent.com\/blog\/%f0%9f%a7%be-mazur-explained-litigation-just-got-pricier\/","title":{"rendered":"\ud83e\uddfe Mazur explained: Litigation just got pricier"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Together with<\/h4>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Table of Contents<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n

If you take just one thing from this email…<\/b><\/p>\n

The High Court has made clear that only qualified solicitors can run litigation \u2014 paralegals and other unqualified staff can help, but they can\u2019t manage a case themselves.<\/p>\n

This changes how a lot of law firms operate, especially those relying on paralegals for routine legal work.<\/p>\n

It also creates real uncertainty for the SRA, education providers, and firms trying to follow the rules on who can legally conduct litigation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

EDITOR\u2019S RAMBLE \ud83d\udde3<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n

It\u2019s \u201cback to school\u201d season \ud83d\ude2d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

That means we\u2019re recruiting for our LittleLaw Campus Ambassadors (it’s a paid role).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

So, if you (1) like LittleLaw, and (2) go to a UK university, fill out this form<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The deadline to apply is 6pm on Monday 13 October<\/b> (no extensions)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

FEATURED REPORT <\/b>\ud83d\udcf0<\/h3>\n
\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

What\u2019s going on here?<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n

A recent High Court ruling in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys<\/i> has shaken up how law firms use their paralegals. The court decided that law firm staff who aren\u2019t qualified solicitors can help with litigation, but they can\u2019t run litigation themselves.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This decision has confuses a lot of paralegals. Some aren\u2019t sure if they can keep doing parts of the work that they\u2019ve been doing for years.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

What was this about?<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n

Charles Russell Speechlys<\/b>, a major City law firm, did some legal work for two clients, Julia Mazur and Jerome Stuart. When they didn\u2019t pay their \u00a354,000 bill, the law firm hired Goldsmith Bowers Solicitors to recover the debt.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

When Goldsmith Bowers filed a claim in court, the main legal document (called the particulars of claim)<\/i> was signed by Peter Middleton, the firm\u2019s head of commercial litigation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The problem was that Peter Middleton wasn\u2019t a practising solicitor. He had been suspended in 2008<\/a> and never got his practising certificate back. When Goldsmith Bowers later hired him, they even needed special permission from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) \u2014 the regulator for solicitors \u2014 to employ him.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Mazur and Stuart found out about this and argued that Middleton wasn\u2019t legally allowed to run the case. They said only authorised solicitors can conduct litigation \u2014 and Middleton wasn\u2019t one.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The case reached the High Court, which had to decide whether someone like Middleton could legally conduct litigation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

What does the law say?<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n

The Legal Services Act 2007<\/a> explains which legal tasks only<\/i> qualified professionals are allowed to do. These are called \u201creserved legal activities\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n