The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has provided important clarification on a question central to modern legal practice: can paralegals conduct litigation?
In Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2026] EWCA Civ 369, arising from a dispute concerning the role of unqualified staff in litigation handling, the court addressed the proper interpretation of the “conduct of litigation” within the statutory framework. The decision departs from the more restrictive approach adopted by the High Court in 2025 and reaffirms established practice across UK law firms.
Legal Context: The Meaning of “Conduct of Litigation”
Under the Legal Services Act 2007, the “conduct of litigation” is a reserved legal activity (Schedule 2, Part 1), restricted to authorised persons such as solicitors and chartered legal executives.
In practice, however, litigation has long been delivered through team-based structures. Paralegals routinely undertake substantial preparatory and procedural work under supervision. The difficulty has not been the statutory principle, but its application to modern legal delivery models.
The High Court’s 2025 interpretation unsettled that position by suggesting that even supervised work by unqualified staff might fall within the prohibition. This created uncertainty across the sector, particularly for firms operating high-volume litigation models.
Can Paralegals Conduct Litigation After Mazur?
The Court of Appeal has now clarified the position. As a matter of statutory interpretation, it drew a critical distinction between:
- Carrying out litigation tasks
- Being legally responsible for the conduct of litigation
Authorised lawyers remain the individuals conducting litigation in law. However, they are entitled to delegate substantive tasks to paralegals and other unqualified staff, provided that proper supervision and control are maintained.
In practical terms, the answer to the question “can paralegals conduct litigation?” is no in law, but yes in function under supervision.
This is not a relaxation of the statutory framework, but a clarification of how it operates in practice.
A Redefined Boundary: Execution vs Responsibility
The significance of the ruling lies in its reframing of the legal boundary. The focus is no longer on who performs individual tasks, but on who retains ultimate responsibility.
Paralegals may:
- Draft statements of case
- Prepare trial bundles
- Progress claims procedurally
However, they cannot assume independent responsibility for proceedings. That responsibility remains non-delegable and rests with the authorised lawyer on the record.
The court has therefore reaffirmed the reality of modern legal practice while preserving the central principle of professional accountability.
Practical Compliance Steps for Law Firms
For many firms, particularly in areas such as personal injury, housing, and debt recovery, the decision restores operational certainty. However, it also raises the compliance threshold.
Delegation is lawful only where supervision is demonstrably effective.
Firms should now ensure:
- Clearly defined and structured supervision frameworks
- Regular, documented file reviews by authorised lawyers
- Audit trails evidencing oversight and decision-making
- Active, not merely nominal, supervisory engagement
The regulatory emphasis is likely to shift from who does the work to how that work is supervised.
Regulatory and Risk Considerations
The decision is expected to influence the approach of the Solicitors Regulation Authority, particularly in cases involving inadequate supervision.
The key risk for firms is no longer that paralegals are undertaking litigation tasks, but that authorised individuals may be unable to demonstrate sufficient control over the work carried out in their name.
Compliance will increasingly depend on systems, documentation, and verifiable supervision.
Conclusion
Continuing Professional Development for solicitors is no longer a matter of meeting formal requirements. Under the SRA’s continuing competence framework, CPD is an ongoing and reflective process that supports professional judgement, learning and improvement throughout a solicitor’s career.
Whether undertaken through formal training, legal research, or the writing and publication of professional content, effective CPD strengthens competence, enhances client protection and helps solicitors respond confidently to change within the legal landscape.
Solicitors who approach CPD with intent and reflection do more than meet regulatory expectations. They position themselves to lead, adapt and progress alongside an evolving profession.
