Mazur in the courts: from “naked opportunism” to “I can’t ignore it”


Bowden: Unwritten rule emerging

A barrister who has had to argue the Mazur ruling from both sides in recent weeks has highlighted the different approaches courts are taking.

David Bowden, who practises from Erimus Chambers, said that in the first case he was instructed to resist the argument.

He said he pointed out that the court application under scrutiny was signed in the firm’s name. Whilst the witness statement was in the name of a trainee solicitor, it stated he was supervised by a named partner and that the costs schedule had a few units charged for the partner’s time. The application was dismissed.

In the second case, from the other side, he applied to have a case dismissed because a non-authorised person at the claimant’s solicitors had signed the claim form.

“The judge rejected this as ‘naked opportunism’ with an oral application being made only at the start of a small claims trial,” he recounted.

But yesterday in Aldershot, Mr Bowden succeeded in making a similar application.

“The district judge… refused to strike out the claim (as had Sheldon J in Mazur). However, the judge adjourned the case off for 28 days for the claimant’s solicitors to explain the position or to make an application to regularise the position.

“Here an unqualified paralegal had a few days ago signed a costs schedule. The judge’s concluding remarks were ‘I appreciate that from claimant’s point of view this is disappointing. However it is not a matter that this court can simply overlook’.”

Well-known costs barrister Sarah Robson of Alpha Court Chambers responded on LinkedIn to Mr Bowden to say that Birmingham County Court was currently adjourning any Mazur issues to be heard by the designated civil judge, Her Honour Judge Emma Kelly.

Mr Bowden told Legal Futures that he sensed the emergence of an “unwritten rule” that, where both sides have a Mazur issue, they would “keep quiet about it”.

Yesterday, CILEX announced that it has applied for permission to appeal Mazur to the Court of Appeal.

Our live Mazur – Your questions answered webinar is taking place on 28 November. Please also take this short survey on the impact of Mazur at your firm.




Blog


Regulate sole practices on evidence, not turnover

For a sole practice, the SRA’s plan that I cannot hold a compliance role if my firm has more than £600,000 of turnover is not a measure of risk. It is a ceiling on growth.


Is Google becoming pay-to-play for law firms?

For years, law firms have been told that SEO is the long-term alternative to paying for every click. That principle hasn’t disappeared but search results have changed significantly.


Material information and the case for intelligent client onboarding

Upfront information means work traditionally undertaken after an offer is accepted will need to happen earlier. And that fundamentally changes the role of client onboarding.


Loading animation