header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 October 2025 / John Gould
Issue: 8137 / Categories: Features , Profession , Regulatory , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Delegation v dereliction of duty?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
234230
Mazur has confirmed what we all knew, says John Gould: some legal services can only be provided by those who are authorised to do so
  • The judgment in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys confirms the law as set out in the Legal Services Act 2007.
  • The key question is how to distinguish between those who are ‘conducting’ a case and those who are only working on it. The person responsible for a particular matter must be an authorised person.
  • Mazur should prompt non-compliant firms to make corrections before they are prosecuted or suffer disciplinary consequences.

From the moment judgment was handed down in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), expressions of alarm have been sounding like klaxons. This is surprising because, as those familiar with the relevant law know, the decision very properly restates the law as it has existed for many years.

The Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA 2007) set out the framework for the regulation of persons who carry out certain legal

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Zylpha LogoClick to know more
Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Read All
SRA sounds warning over AI misuse as reports & investigations mount
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
NLJ this week Civil way: Practical procedure lessons & cautionary tales
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
NLJ this week: Fraud in the digital age

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

NLJ this week: Right outcome, troubling reasoning?
How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
NLJ this week: Love, money & the spreadsheet
Can a meticulously maintained spreadsheet turn a couple’s informal financial arrangements into legally enforceable obligations? 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll