On 31 March 2026, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) issued a formal statement responding to the Court of Appeal judgment in Mazur v CILEX, following significant uncertainty across the legal profession after the original High Court decision. Read the statement here.
The Court of Appeal ruling provides much‑needed clarity on a critical issue: whether unauthorised individuals may lawfully conduct litigation when acting under the supervision of an authorised lawyer.
Background: Why the Mazur Judgment Caused Concern
The original Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP decision created widespread concern among law firms and practitioners by calling into question long‑standing supervision and delegation practices. Firms expressed uncertainty about whether work routinely undertaken by non‑authorised staff could lawfully continue, even when properly supervised.
The SRA acknowledged the “concern and confusion among practitioners and firms” following the original ruling and confirmed that it had focused on providing support during this period of uncertainty.
The Court of Appeal’s Key Finding
The Court of Appeal overturned the earlier interpretation and concluded that:
An unauthorised person can lawfully conduct litigation provided they do so under the appropriate supervision of an authorised individual.
This clarification aligns with historical practice across the profession and confirms that delegation of litigation tasks remains lawful where suitable supervision is in place.
The SRA’s Position Following the Judgment
In its statement, the SRA welcomed the clear direction from the Court of Appeal, highlighting that the judgment offers much‑needed certainty for firms and practitioners.
The regulator confirmed that it is:
- Reviewing the full detail of the judgment
- Assessing its existing guidance
- Preparing to update guidance where necessary, in light of the ruling
The SRA emphasised that this work will be undertaken as soon as possible to ensure regulated firms have clear, up‑to‑date regulatory expectations.
Ensuring Consistency Across the Regulatory Landscape
The SRA also stated that it will be:
- Working closely with other regulators and organisations
- Ensuring consistency and clarity across the profession following the judgment
This acknowledges the broader regulatory implications of the decision, particularly for multidisciplinary teams and varied authorised roles within legal services.
Immediate Support for Firms and Practitioners
While updated guidance is under review, the SRA confirmed that:
- Firms and lawyers are encouraged to review the Court of Appeal judgment directly
- The Professional Ethics Helpline remains available to provide advice and support on any immediate questions or compliance concerns
This interim approach reflects the regulator’s recognition of the judgment’s operational impact and the need for practical support during the transition.
Why the Judgment Matters
The Court of Appeal’s decision restores legal certainty around:
- Delegation within litigation teams
- Supervision frameworks
- Responsibility remaining firmly with the authorised individual
For many firms, the judgment confirms that well‑established working practices remain lawful, provided appropriate supervision arrangements are maintained.
Key Takeaway
The SRA’s response underscores a pivotal regulatory message:
Delegation is permissible — but accountability stays with the authorised professional.
With clearer judicial guidance now in place, firms can operate with renewed confidence while awaiting updated regulatory guidance.
As firms absorb the implications, this judgment reinforces the importance of robust supervision, documented accountability, and clear internal arrangements — principles that remain central to regulatory compliance.