Chartered Legal Executives are one group that have been significantly impacted by Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB).
It appears that not all Charted Legal Executives are created equally. Those who now qualify via the CILEX Professional Qualification acquire the right to conduct litigation as part of qualification process. For those who became Charted Legal Executives through earlier qualification processes, they need to have obtained a specific right to conduct litigation separately from their basic qualification. There are three routes available: by assessment, by portfolio, or by training and assessment. It appears that a large proportion of Charted Legal Executives currently do not have the necessary authorisation to conduct litigation. This has come as a shock to many who believed they were able to conduct litigation by virtue of working for regulated firms of solicitors. It means that, in the same way as for completely unqualified paralegals, these Chartered Legal Executives cannot have their own caseloads (even though previously some not only had their own caseloads but headed up whole litigation departments).
It is possible to check via the CILEX Authorised Practitioners Directory whether an individual has the relevant authority, although it is not entirely intuitive has to how it works. A search by name will produce details that include their “Practising Rights”. For the majority, this just says: “Chartered Legal Executive”, thus:
| Practising Rights | Authorisation Date |
| Chartered Legal Executive | 16/05/2024 |
This is unhelpful, to say the least. The first sentence to the Directory states: “The directory contains details of practising Chartered Legal Executives (Fellows) and CILEX Practitioners authorised by us to carry out legal work in England and Wales”. However, there is no requirement for anyone to be authorised to carry out legal work. The restrictions imposed by the Legal Services Act 2007 are in relation to “reserved legal activities”. One has to look elsewhere on the CILEX website to discover that Chartered Legal Executive status alone only authorises them to carry out the reserved legal activity of administering oaths. The Directory simply stating that an individual’s Practising Rights are “Chartered Legal Executive” is liable to mislead. If it means no more than being able to administer oaths, this is what is should state. It is almost as though CILEX have been trying to disguise how limited the rights of most Chartered Legal Executives really are.
When you search for a name where there is a right to conduct litigation, you will see something like this:
| Practising Rights | Authorisation Date |
| CILEX Litigator and Advocate (Civil) | 16/05/2024 |
| Chartered Legal Executive | 18/07/2021 |
Discover more from Legal Costs Specialists - Gibbs Wyatt Stone
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
4 thoughts on “Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys – what about Chartered Legal Executives?”
Simon, I
* have looked at sample entries in the “CILEX Authorised Practitioners Directory” that you kindly linked to and
* read your sentence “Those who NOW qualify VIA THE CILEX PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATION acquire the right to conduct litigation as part of qualification process” [my emphasis] but
* am still confused!
Firstly, do all Chartered Legal Executives who now qualify do so via the “CILEX Professional Qualification” – or do some of them (still) do so via other or earlier qualification processes?
If everyone who now qualifies as a Chartered Legal Executive acquires the right to conduct litigation, since what date is that the case?
And, where (as in the first table in your blog-post) the CILEX Authorised Practitioners Directory contains details of a Chartered Legal Executive and does not state other “Practising Rights”, does it necessary follow that the individual concerned does not have the right to conduct litigation – or could they be one of the cohort that qualified via the CILEX Professional Qualification and acquired the right to conduct litigation as part of the qualification process?
All good questions to which I do not have the answers. The Directory is clearly a mess. If, as seems to be the case, most Chartered Legal Executives are not authorised to conduct litigation and are only authorised to administer oaths, then that is what should be stated under “Practising Rights”. It is an unhelpful tautology to say a Chartered Legal Executive’s practising rights are “Chartered Legal Executives”.
For what it’s worth, I have (on Bluesky) just linked to this blog and invited “CILEx Regulation” to respond to my questions.
CILEx Regulation have not responded to me. So (again on Bluesky), I have (with another link to this blog) just informed John Hyde (Deputy News Editor of the Law Society Gazette) that a consumer cannot reliably find out whether a given Chartered Legal Executive has the right to conduct litigation – because CILEx Regulation’s “Authorised Practitioners Directory” is “clearly a mess.”