‘Insufficient cross-regulator collaboration on Legal Services Act guidance before Mazur’ – LSB
Summary
The Legal Services Board has concluded that inconsistent guidance following the Mazur case was driven by insufficient cross-regulator engagement and differing interpretations of the Legal Services Act. It said regulators updated guidance constructively after the judgments, but earlier advice lacked clarity and consistency, creating risks of uneven outcomes for regulated professionals.
Why it matters
Although the article concerns legal services regulation rather than surveying directly, it highlights how unclear supervision and guidance can create compliance risk across regulated professional activities. Surveyors involved in legal-adjacent work, reserved activities, or multidisciplinary practices should note the emphasis on clear supervision, consistent guidance and stronger assurance processes.
Key points
- LSB found insufficient collaboration between regulators led to inconsistent guidance on the Legal Services Act.
- The Mazur judgment exposed uncertainty around conduct of litigation by unqualified professionals.
- Several regulators later updated guidance, including the SRA and CILEx Regulation.
- LSB wants clearer explanations of adequate supervision and better sharing of draft guidance.
- The review will extend to other reserved legal activities to check for similar inconsistencies.
This is an RPSA summary of a publicly available article. The full content remains with the original publisher.
