The law on who can carry out litigation work within a firm has now been clarified by the Court of Appeal in CILEX and others v Mazur and others.
This is an important development for both solicitors and clients, particularly in the context of Solicitors Act assessments and challenges to legal fees.
What was the issue in Mazur?
The core question was whether work carried out by non-qualified staff within a law firm amounted to the “conduct of litigation”, which is a reserved legal activity.
The earlier High Court decision suggested a strict position, effectively drawing a line between:
- Assisting a solicitor, which is allowed
- Conducting litigation under supervision, which was said to be unlawful
That caused immediate concern across the profession.
What has the Court of Appeal decided?
The Court of Appeal has now overturned that approach.
It confirmed that:
- Work forming part of litigation can be carried out by non-qualified staff
- This is lawful provided it is done on behalf of, and under the supervision of, an authorised individual
- The authorised solicitor retains responsibility for the work at all times
In other words, the focus is not on who physically performs the task, but on who is directing, controlling and taking responsibility for it
What does this mean in practice?
The decision restores the position that most firms have operated under for years.
It confirms that:
- Delegation within a firm is lawful
- Proper supervision is key
- There is no requirement for a solicitor to personally carry out every step
However, the responsibility still sits firmly with the supervising solicitor.
Why this matters for challenging solicitor’s bills
This has a direct link to Solicitors Act 1974 assessments.
When a bill is challenged, the court looks at whether the costs are:
- Reasonable
- Proportionate
- Properly incurred
Following this decision, the court will not simply reduce a bill because work was carried out by non-qualified staff.
But that does not mean those issues are irrelevant.
Where costs can still be challenged
Even after Mazur, there are still strong grounds to challenge fees where:
- Work has been poorly supervised
- Tasks have been duplicated or carried out inefficiently
- Higher-grade fee earners have been used unnecessarily
- The overall approach to the work was disproportionate
The key point is this.
It is not delegation itself that is the problem. It is how that delegation is managed.
The real takeaway
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that modern legal practice, where work is delegated within a team, is lawful.
But it has also reinforced something equally important.
The supervising solicitor remains fully responsible for:
- The quality of the work
- The way the case is conducted
- The costs incurred
That responsibility is exactly what is examined in a Solicitors Act assessment.
Final point
If you are considering challenging a solicitor’s bill, this decision does not remove your ability to do so.
It simply clarifies the framework.
Bills can still be reduced where the work, or the way it was carried out, does not justify the costs charged.
Need advice on a solicitor’s bill?
At Cook Legal Costs Ltd, we specialise in reviewing and challenging legal fees.
If you believe you have been overcharged, we can assess your bill and advise on your options.