Legal executives who had dreaded today’s Mazur ruling have spoken of their relief at being cleared to conduct litigation again.
The Court of Appeal made clear it was lawful for unauthorised staff to conduct litigation under the supervision of an authorised solicitor – overturning the judgment from last September of Mr Justice Sheldon.
Lord Justice Birss said that an unauthorised person may perform any tasks within the scope of litigation conduct provided the solicitor or firm retains responsibility for the delegated tasks.
The upshot is perhaps not an exact return to how the legal sector operated pre-Mazur - extra supervision would appear inevitable - but nevertheless is a huge boost for legal executives, paralegals and trainees who feared for their futures if Sheldon’s position was upheld.
Victoria Neale, a graduate member of CILEx at Pepperells, based in Newcastle, started as an office junior at 16 and worked her way through every level of the firm: She said: ‘We had reached a point where solicitors and CILEx lawyers were considered equals but Mazur caused that perception to slip unnecessarily. Having the appeal upheld represents a return to common sense – it means we can once again carry out the work we have always been qualified to do.
‘For a lot of people, there simply is not another option to get into law. Not everyone has a law degree or the ability to take time out to return to university. Many young professionals join a law firm, discover a real passion for the work, and need an alternative route to progress. CILEX was that route for me, and it remains an outstanding pathway into the legal profession.’
Her colleague Selin Cetin, a trainee solicitor, admitted that she had been concerned about what the ruling meant for her career path. ‘It can feel like your value is diminished,’ she said. ‘I am concerned that the long-term impact of Mazur could put younger people off pursuing the CILEx route altogether.’
CILEX members had formed their own support group to offer advice and support following the Mazur decision. David Thomas, one of its core members, welcomed the appeal court’s decision and said it felt like confirmation of legal executives’ role in the legal sector.
He added: ‘It brings much-needed clarity and reflects a welcome dose of common sense. For many committed and highly capable chartered legal executives and other non-solicitor practitioners, this will come as a significant relief.
‘Today’s landmark judgment rightly recognises the valuable contribution these lawyers make to the delivery of legal service.’
Lisa Burton-Durham, chartered legal executive and group director of south east firm Family Law Partners, who was denied the right to represent a client based on Mazur, said: ‘This is a welcome decision. The court have clearly approached this issue in a pragmatic way. I really hope that this provides the opportunity for the regulators to work quickly and collaboratively to ensure absolute clarity in relation to what can and cannot be done.’
Crucially, the judgment has given reassurance to law centres that its model of bringing together solicitors and caseworkers is lawful, so long as there is a robust supervisory framework. The Law Centres Network intervened in the appeal to ask for clarity.
A spokesperson said: ‘Every day, law centres support individuals who would otherwise have to navigate the legal system alone: people at risk of losing their homes, their income, or facing discrimination. For many, the alternative is not a different provider - it is no help at all. This judgment recognises, in practical terms, how legal help is delivered on the frontline, and why that matters.’
No comments yet