Legal Services Board review to examine regulator conduct and guidance from 2010 to 2025
The Legal Services Board (LSB) has confirmed the scope of its wide-ranging review into how regulators provided and verified guidance about who may lawfully conduct litigation, following the High Court’s ruling in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP. The review will span a fifteen-year period from 1 January 2010 to 24 October 2025, beginning from when key provisions of the Legal Services Act 2007 took effect and running through to the aftermath of the Mazur judgment. A final report is scheduled for publication in March 2026.
The LSB’s review, launched earlier this month, follows mounting criticism of regulatory messaging and communication across the legal sector, particularly from professional bodies such as CILEX. Concerns were raised after it emerged that the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had incorrectly advised the law firm involved in Mazur that non-authorised individuals could conduct litigation under supervision—an interpretation later ruled incorrect by the High Court.
The Mazur case clarified that employees without practising certificates cannot themselves conduct litigation, even if they are supervised by an authorised solicitor. The decision has had far-reaching implications, prompting law firms to re-examine their internal processes and review which staff members are authorised to carry out litigation activities.
Embed from Getty Images
In a statement outlining the parameters of its review, the LSB said it would focus on how “approved regulators (where appropriate through their regulatory bodies)” provided advice, guidance, and oversight under the Legal Services Act. It will examine whether such communications were accurate, complete, and compliant with the legislation governing the conduct of litigation.
The LSB confirmed that the review will assess all forms of guidance issued by regulators, whether formally published or informally communicated. This includes documents and digital formats such as emails, blogs, practice notes, and transcripts of video content. The LSB described this as “a non-exhaustive list” and stated that regulators should interpret its information request broadly.
The review will also consider queries raised directly by solicitors and firms seeking clarification from regulators about litigation rights and permissions. In addition, it will examine any disciplinary, supervisory, or remedial actions taken in response to instances of unauthorised conduct of litigation.
According to the LSB, the review’s purpose is to establish how regulators ensured that their advice to the profession remained consistent with statutory requirements over the fifteen-year period. It aims to determine whether any gaps, inaccuracies, or inconsistencies in regulatory guidance contributed to confusion within the profession about who is authorised to conduct litigation.
The LSB said the findings will be used to identify whether improvements are needed in how legal regulators communicate and coordinate their interpretation of the Legal Services Act, especially in areas where professional rights overlap.
Separately, CILEX continues to await the outcome of its fast-track application to the LSB, which seeks to allow chartered legal executives to obtain standalone rights to conduct litigation without solicitor supervision. A decision on that application is expected by the middle of next week.
The LSB’s Mazur review comes amid ongoing uncertainty for law firms following the ruling. The decision has already led to cost challenges in some cases where unauthorised staff were found to have signed or progressed litigation documents. Regulators are under pressure to clarify professional guidance quickly to ensure firms remain compliant with the Legal Services Act while avoiding disruption to clients and ongoing cases.
The LSB confirmed that its review is being treated as a priority and that the results, when published in 2026, will form the basis for potential improvements to regulatory practices and communication standards across the legal profession.