CILEX seeks to clarify impact of Mazur ruling on litigation practice rights

In a statement on the High Court decision, the professional body said: "A Chartered Legal Executive who does not hold separate litigation practice rights is not authorised to conduct litigation.

"While some reserved areas of practice (conveyancing and probate) allow more scope for supervised work, litigation is different and has stricter rules."

The comment comes after the decision in Julia Mazur & Ors v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), in which Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that an employee of an authorised firm cannot conduct litigation simply by virtue of their employment, even if supervised by an authorised person.

Summarising the decision, CILEX said: "The Court ruled that anyone who is not authorised to conduct litigation cannot do so under supervision. You can support and assist an authorised colleague, but you can't carry out litigation yourself unless you hold practice rights."

In response to last month’s ruling, the Law Society stated that it raises questions about when someone without a practice certificate is supporting, as opposed to conducting litigation.

A spokesperson for the Law Society said the boundary between conducting litigation and assisting an authorised person to do so “remains something of a grey area, on which further clarification would be welcome”.

CILEX meanwhile said that it plans to work with regulators and other stakeholders to "push for clearer and simpler guidance" on the authorisation system.

Many councils employ CILEX-qualified lawyers in their legal teams, often alongside solicitors and barristers.

CILEX also published responses to frequently asked questions providing clarification on litigation.

These covered whether Chartered Legal Executives can conduct litigation, and whether CILEX Fellows/CILEX Chartered Legal Executives without practicing rights can have files in their own names for litigation cases, among other questions.

Adam Carey