October 2025

What does Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) mean for unauthorised costs draftsmen? I would suggest very little. (Separately, authorised Costs Lawyers have the right to conduct litigation (so far as it relates to costs matters).) Steps such as drafting Bills of Costs, Points of Dispute, Replies and Costs Budgets […]

What does Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) mean for advocacy? The short answer is: nothing. And I do not mean that just in the sense that Mazur was only meant to clarify the existing law as opposed to creating new law. Mazur was concerned with the discrete issue of

Following on with the analysis of the fallout from Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), if an unauthorised fee earner is able to: Deal with their own cases up to the point proceedings are issued and undertake most post-litigation work so long as the case itself is being conducted

What tasks can Grade D fee earners undertake in light of Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB)? Is this the death of the Grade D fee earner? In fact, Mazur is of far wider application than just to Grade D fee earners. Grade C fee earners are described in the