By Sarah Crowther, Matt Williams & Jessica Brain
|
Published 31 March 2026
"An unauthorised person may lawfully perform any tasks, which are within the scope of the conduct of litigation, for and on behalf of an authorised individual such as a solicitor or appropriately authorised CILEX member, provided the authorised individual retains responsibility for the tasks delegated to the unauthorised person (both formal responsibility and the responsibilities identified at section 1(3) of the 2007 Act). In that situation, the authorised individual is the person carrying on the conduct of litigation."
Underlying facts
Goldsmith Bowers Solicitors (GBS) were instructed by Charles Russell Speechlys LLP (CRS) to recover unpaid legal fees from Julia Mazur and Jerome Stuart. The particulars of claim were signed by Peter Middleton, Head of Commercial Litigation at GBS, who did not hold a practising certificate. Ms Mazur and Mr Stuart challenged Mr Middleton's authority to conduct litigation, arguing he was not authorised under the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA).
The courts' decisions
The County Court stayed the proceedings, finding that Mr Middleton may have been conducting a reserved legal activity without proper authorisation. Following an application by CRS, the stay was lifted. By that time:
- Mr Middleton had been replaced by a qualified solicitor with a practising certificate, and
- Following a self-report by GBS to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the SRA had concluded that: "We are satisfied that Mr. Middleton has not conducted a reserved legal activity without entitlement to do so, and are satisfied no further action is required on this occasion"
Ms Mazur and Mr Stuart appealed the lifting of the stay. The key legal question for the High Court was: can a non-authorised person conduct litigation under supervision or within an authorised firm? In September 2025, Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that they could not. He held that only authorised persons (or those falling within an exempt category under section 19 of the LSA) may conduct litigation. Neither employment by an authorised firm nor supervision by an authorised person is sufficient to allow non authorised individuals to conduct litigation.
The Court of Appeal decision
In February 2026, the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX) brought an appeal of that decision. The Court of Appeal was asked to decide whether non-authorised people (such as legal executives who do not hold a Rights to Conduct Litigation Certificate, paralegals and/or trainees) may perform tasks which are within the scope of 'conduct of litigation'. It held that they could, provided that the authorised individual retains responsibility for the tasks delegated to the unauthorised person.
Following the High Court's decision in September last year, the Law Society and SRA issued guidance notes. It is likely that the Court of Appeal's decision will prompt further publications from the regulators.
