Message to members – Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys: FAQs
These FAQs are regularly updated with the latest information available at the time. If you’re unsure about any of the information included in these FAQs, please contact us.
Last updated 18 November 2025
About the ruling
1. What does the ruling say?
The Court ruled that anyone who is not authorised to conduct litigation cannot do so under supervision. You can support and assist an authorised colleague, but you can’t conduct litigation yourself unless you hold practice rights.
2. What CILEX members are impacted by the ruling?
CILEX members who are practising in litigation and do not have practice rights are not authorised to conduct litigation; you must ensure your contribution remains strictly in assisting the litigation, not conducting it. Fellows with litigation practice rights are authorised to conduct litigation.
If you are a member with practice rights who is supervising those without, you must ensure they are not conducting litigation. Please refer to CRL’s Mazur information hub for the latest guidance and FAQs.
CILEX members who are currently studying a litigation route on the CILEX Level 6 qualifications are encouraged to complete their practice rights application on achievement of CILEX Fellow status, in order to be authorised to conduct litigation.
CILEX members who have completed, or are currently studying, the CILEX Professional Qualification (CPQ), will qualify with practice rights through the CILEx Regulation (CRL) process and will be authorised to conduct litigation on completion. We would remind members still studying to ensure they are aware of the guidance and are not conducting litigation until authorised to do so.
All members should be aware of their professional and regulatory obligations, and are encouraged to take this opportunity to understand the clarification provided by this ruling. We understand there is a lot of information to digest, so if you’re unsure of your authorisation, please contact CRL for guidance.
3. I work in litigation, what action should I take now?
Your first step should be to review the guidance and apply it to your circumstances. If your role requires you to conduct litigation, rather than assisting, and you do not have practice rights, you should consider your route to authorisation.
The process for authorisation is determined by our independent regulator, CILEx Regulation (CRL) and approved by the Legal Services Board, so anyone seeking practice rights must apply using one of the approved methods. There are three approved routes to apply for authorisation:
- 1. Assessed Portfolio
- 2. ULAW Assessment
- 3. ULAW Training and Assessment
Please refer to the CRL’s Mazur information hub for current guidance on submitting an application under either the new Litigation route, or the Litigation and Advocacy route.
4. Why hasn’t CILEX told me I need practice rights before now?
Our intention has always been to give sound guidance and support on practice rights, based on the latest information and guidance provided by our independent regulator CRL. We acted in good faith, doing our best to communicate the latest regulatory guidance available, but we acknowledge that we may not have always got this right.
We have had regular communications with members through a range of channels including a dedicated member portal, newsletters, emails, journal articles, and sessions at in-person events, where members have been strongly encouraged to gain their practice rights since they became available in 2014.
Additionally, we launched the CILEX Lawyer eligibility checker in December 2022. This tool was developed to help members ensure they were operating within their authorisation. It has supported more than 2,300 members who have used the service to understand their responsibilities, with a number of those having gone on to obtain practice rights. The eligibility checker can be reviewed and updated at any time in the CILEX Lawyer and Practice Rights Hub in the myCILEX portal.
5. CILEX has previously said I can conduct litigation under supervision; am I open to challenge from past clients?
Please refer to CRL’s Mazur information hub for the latest guidance and FAQs.
6. I have practised in litigation for years, why can’t CILEX just give me practice rights?
We understand the frustration this must be causing given your professional status, skills and experience. The process for authorisation is determined by our independent regulatory body, CRL, and approved by the Legal Services Board, so anyone seeking practice rights must apply using one of the approved methods.
We are working as closely with CRL as possible, within the confines of the Internal Governance Rules (IGR’s) set by the LSB, to ensure accurate and timely information is provided to members and provision of simpler guidance to enable the obtaining of practice rights.
CRL is currently exploring various solutions including offering additional assessment sessions through the ULaw route, the scope for efficiencies with all authorisation routes, and providing additional guidance to members.
We also continue to advocate for our members’ best interests with influential stakeholders and organisations within the legal profession.
Please refer to CRL’s Mazur information hub for the latest guidance and FAQs.
7. How can I gain the litigation experience needed to complete the portfolio requirements?
Please refer to CRL’s Mazur Information hub for the latest guidance and FAQs.
8. How is CILEX supporting members and their employers?
We are regularly communicating with members to ensure you are kept up to date and have your questions answered. Please look out for email updates and invites to webinars. We understand that this extends to your employers, so are exploring how we can help support employers to understand what this ruling means for them.
Your wellbeing is particularly important during this time, and we encourage members to seek support if needed. A range of resources is available through your myCILEX account, including free, confidential advice via LawCare.
9. What action is CILEX taking in response to the ruling?
We appreciate the patience of our members while we fully explored the impact and repercussions of this ruling. Since the ruling, CILEX Chief Executive and senior leadership have met with several key organisations within the legal profession, including the Ministry of Justice, Legal Services Board and CILEx Regulation. Within these discussions we have championed the voice of CILEX members to ensure the impacts of this ruling are understood.
CILEX pushed for a swift decision on allowing Chartered Legal Executives to gain practice rights for litigation alone and on 3 November, the Legal Services Board approved CRL’s application. This removed a considerable barrier to gaining practice rights for members wishing to conduct litigation who do not need to carry out advocacy in their roles. Members have been able to apply for standalone litigation rights since early October in anticipation of the LSB’s decision and this option is now available. Please view CRL’s website for further guidance and information
Please see our latest updates for further detail on the actions we’ve been taking.
10. Is my CILEX qualification and professional status diminished by this judgment?
The CILEX Fellow status members achieved before the introduction of the CILEX Professional Qualification in 2021 has opened doors to working in the legal profession or progressing within it.
Those affected by this ruling will have been deploying the knowledge and skills acquired through attaining their qualification every day in their workplaces. The qualification attests to that expertise and we are disheartened some CILEX members are feeling this way. We remain committed to working with members, employers, and the wider legal profession to raise the profile of CILEX members and the crucial expertise and knowledge they bring.
11. I am seeing lots of online guidance on how to apply from other CILEX members, is this correct?
We appreciate the CILEX community coming together to provide support to peers, and can see some useful links and advice being shared. We would reiterate that formal guidance can be found in the dedicated Practice Rights Hub, CRL’s Mazur information hub and individual enquiries should be directed to our Customer Support team via your myCILEX or on 01234 841000.
12. Does being a CILEX Chartered Paralegal give me a route to Practice Rights?
Holding CILEX Chartered Paralegal status does not automatically provide a route to authorisation through Practice Rights. Your eligibility to apply for Practice Rights will depend on the area of law you work in and the experience you’ve gained. Please refer to the CILEx Regulation guidance for further information.
Appeals FAQs
13. Why weren’t CILEX involved in the original case?
CILEX was not aware of nor invited to be heard as part of the original proceedings.
14. How is the appeal being funded?
We will be represented pro bono by leading lawyers in this field: Nick Bacon KC (Head of 4 New Square chambers) and Iain Miller and Stephen Nelson of Kingsley Napley.
15. Why are you appealing the judgment?
Whilst the related law has not changed, the practical application of the interpretation of the relevant law has done, which is in part why we are seeing so many, often significant, real-world impacts on individuals, firms and the sector in general.
We believe that an appeal will be an appropriate vehicle to air the relevant issues causing these impacts and to get clarity around the interpretation of the law, allowing practitioners to again operate with confidence that they are doing so within regulatory boundaries.
16. What is the process/how long will this take?
On Friday 31 October 2025, CILEX applied for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal (as Appellant/Interested party) against the Mazur judgment. If a hearing is permitted, it is hoped that, because of the significance and sector impact caused by the judgment, it will be heard relatively soon at the start of the Spring term.
17. Why didn’t CILEX submit an appeal earlier?
Since the judgment in the Mazur case was handed down, we wanted to ensure that we have pursued every avenue, including legal redress, to address the significant impact the judgment has had on the legal sector and CILEX members. It has become clear, from advice we have sought, that the optimum legal course would be to appeal the judgment rather than identify or wait for some alternative vehicle in the courts, hence our appeal now.
As CILEX was not a party in the original case, making a related appeal is not straightforward. Had any one of the original parties themselves made an appeal, we could have applied to join with them. But they did not do so in the 21 day window permitted to them.
18. What is the basis for the appeal?
Broadly, the basis of the appeal is that the interpretation of the current law was applied too narrowly within the Mazur judgment. We cannot at this stage go into the specifics of the appeal to ensure we don’t compromise our position.
19. How can CILEX appeal if you weren’t part of the original proceedings?
Case law and the Civil Procedure Rules permit a party who was not part of the original proceedings to join those proceedings and appeal out of time.