Regulatory

In the wake of Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys, prudence & clear documentation are key, write Kevin Latham & Fraser Barnstaple

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) must overhaul its complaints and risk assessment processes to fix ‘systemic shortcomings’, the Legal Services Consumer Panel has said

Firms preparing to mount Mazur applications alleging the other side has acted in breach of the Legal Services Act 2007 may be left disappointed, the Law Society has said

Dominic Regan crowns his case of the year with a cut-out-and-keep guide, plus highlights some bumper judgments to read as the nights draw in

Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ

Rather than automatically discrediting AI-generated content, the sector—including the judiciary—needs better AI literacy, argues Dr Alan Ma

Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School and the Frenkel Topping Group—AKA The insider—crowns Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as his case of 2025 in his latest column for NLJ. The High Court’s decision—that non-authorised employees cannot conduct litigation, even under supervision—has sent shockwaves through the profession. Regan calls it the year’s defining moment for civil practitioners and reproduces a ‘cut-out-and-keep’ summary of key rulings from Mr Justice Sheldon

The Legal Services Board (LSB) has launched a post-Mazur regulatory review into litigation rights, and is fast-tracking an application from CILEX

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has published a statement in a bid to clear up confusion over the right to conduct litigation following Mazur and another v Charles Russell Speechleys

In the wake of the Harman review, Barbara Mills KC sets out the Bar Council’s response