header-logo header-logo

14 November 2025 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 8139 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Legal services , Costs , Fees
printer mail-detail

The insider: 14 November 2025

235684
Mazur is still grabbing all the headlines. And rightly so, says Dominic Regan, amid rumblings that the decision was wrongly decided

There is more to litigation life than Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), although it is impossible to avoid the torrent of material it continues to generate.

The decision is not being appealed. It is binding on masters and district judges. Regional Costs Judge Richard Lumb, speaking at the end of last month, explained that he was duty-bound to apply the decision, and said he had done so in a possession case before him where it was obvious from the costs schedule that a grade D fee earner had conducted throughout. Consequently, costs claimed in the region of £3,000 were not allowed. All that could be recovered were fixed costs which, inclusive of the court issue fee, came to less than £500.

Last week, I had the luxury of hosting a discussion about Mazur with Ben Williams KC of 4 New Square

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll