If you are a litigant in person, the way your case is structured now matters more than ever. Following the High Court decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP, the court has made it clear that only authorised or exempt individuals can conduct litigation—and that line is being looked at more closely in practice. The result is that many people, often without realising it, may be exposing their case to unnecessary risk simply through how it is being handled. The good news is that this is entirely manageable. With the right structure in place, you can stay fully compliant, protect your position, and strengthen your case at the same time.

How to Stay Safe as a Litigant in Person After Mazur (Step-by-Step Guide)

If you are a litigant in person, you are already carrying a significant responsibility.

You are managing your own case, navigating court procedure, and making decisions that may have long-term consequences for you and your family.

Following the High Court decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB), there is now an additional layer to that responsibility:

You must not only run your case — you must be seen to be running it.

This is where many people unintentionally expose themselves to risk.

This guide sets out, in practical terms, how to stay safe, compliant, and in control — while still getting the support you need.

Step 1: Understand the One Rule That Matters

Everything in this area comes back to a single principle:

You are the one conducting your case.

That means:

• You make the decisions
• You give the instructions
• You take responsibility for what is filed and said

This is not about doing everything alone.

It is about ensuring that, at every stage, it is clear that the case is yours.

If that is maintained, you are on solid ground.

Step 2: Separate “Support” from “Control”

The most common mistake litigants make is confusing support with control.

Support is allowed — and often essential.

Control must remain with you.

To make this clear, apply this simple test:

“Am I the one making the decision and taking the step?”

If the answer is yes, you are within the correct structure.

If the answer is unclear, that is where risk begins.

For example:

• If someone drafts a document for you → that is support
• If someone decides what goes in that document → that may be control
• If someone sends the document on your behalf → that may cross the line

The difference is subtle, but important.

Step 3: Take Ownership of Every Document

Every document in your case should be something you can stand behind.

That means:

• You have read it
• You understand it
• You agree with it

In practical terms:

• Do not submit anything you have not reviewed carefully
• Do not rely on “it’s been handled”
• Do not allow documents to be sent without your approval

Your name is on the case. The responsibility follows it.

Step 4: You Send the Emails

This is one of the simplest and most important safeguards.

All communications with:

• The court
• The other party
• Solicitors

should be sent by you.

Support can help you draft those emails.

But you should be the one pressing send.

This ensures that:

• Your role is clear
• Your control is visible
• Your position cannot be easily challenged

It also reinforces your credibility as a litigant in person.

Step 5: You Sign and File Everything

This is non-negotiable.

All documents:

• Statements
• Position statements
• Applications

must be:

• Signed by you
• Filed by you

This is not just procedural.

It is a clear marker of who is conducting the case.

Where that marker is missing, questions can arise.

Step 6: Maintain a Clear Audit Trail

If your case were examined closely, you should be able to show:

• That you made decisions
• That you approved documents
• That you gave instructions

This does not require complex systems.

It can be as simple as:

• Email confirmations
• Document versions showing your approval
• Clear communication records

The aim is clarity.

If it is clear that you are in control, your position is protected.

Step 7: Be Careful Who You Rely On

Not all support is structured in the same way.

Some models are careful to remain within the boundaries of support.

Others may move closer to running the case, sometimes without clearly recognising the distinction.

This is not always obvious at the outset.

But you should be alert to signs such as:

• Someone taking over communications
• Decisions being made without your input
• A sense that the case is being “handled” for you

These are indicators that the structure may need to be corrected.

Step 8: Understand How the Court Sees It

The court is not concerned with internal arrangements.

It looks at what is visible.

From the court’s perspective, the key question is simple:

Who appears to be running this case?

If the answer is clearly you, there is no issue.

If the answer is unclear, the court may take a closer look.

Clarity removes that risk entirely.

Step 9: Do Not Lose Your Voice in Your Own Case

One of the unintended consequences of over-reliance on support is that litigants can lose confidence in their own voice.

This can show in:

• Hesitation in court
• Uncertainty about their own position
• Difficulty responding to questions

Staying in control of your case avoids this.

It ensures that:

• You understand your arguments
• You can explain your position
• You remain engaged with the process

This is not just legally important.

It is strategically important.

Step 10: Use Support Properly — and Powerfully

The answer to all of this is not to avoid support.

It is to use it properly.

When structured correctly, support can:

• Strengthen your case
• Improve your preparation
• Increase your confidence
• Enhance how your case is presented

But it should always operate behind your role — not replace it.

You remain the decision-maker. Support strengthens you, not substitutes you.

Step 11: Recognise the Red Flags Early

One of the most effective ways to protect your case is to recognise when the structure is beginning to drift.

This rarely happens suddenly. It is usually gradual.

Support becomes more involved. Communication becomes more direct. Decisions start to feel less like yours and more like something being done “for you”.

That is the point at which you need to pause and reassess.

Common red flags include:

• Emails being sent without your direct involvement
• Documents being finalised without your review
• Instructions being given on your behalf
• A sense that you are being told what will happen, rather than deciding it

None of these, in isolation, automatically creates a problem.

But taken together, they can indicate that the structure of your case is no longer clear.

Clarity is what protects you. Loss of clarity is what creates risk.

Step 12: Real-World Scenario — Where Things Go Wrong

To understand how easily this can happen, consider a common scenario.

A litigant in person is overwhelmed. They engage someone to help. That person is experienced and confident. They begin by assisting with drafting. Then they begin to suggest wording. Then they begin to take a more active role in communication.

At first, this feels helpful.

Over time, however, the balance shifts.

The litigant becomes less involved in the detail. Documents are trusted without being fully reviewed. Emails are sent quickly to “keep things moving”.

From the outside, it may now appear that the case is being run by someone else.

This is not usually intentional.

But intention is not the test.

What matters is how the case is being conducted in practice.

Step 13: The “Safe Structure” Checklist

If you want to be confident that your case is properly structured, use this checklist.

You should be able to answer “yes” to all of the following:

• I make the final decisions in my case
• I review and approve every document before it is sent
• I send all emails in my own name
• I sign all statements and applications personally
• I understand the key points being made in my case
• I can explain my position to the court

If any of these answers are “no”, that is an opportunity to bring the structure back into line.

This is not about blame.

It is about clarity and control.

Step 14: Common Mistakes to Avoid

There are a number of recurring mistakes that litigants make, particularly when under pressure.

These include:

1. Delegating decisions
Allowing someone else to decide what should be said or done without your full involvement.

2. Not reviewing documents properly
Signing or sending documents without fully understanding their content.

3. Allowing others to communicate on your behalf
This is one of the clearest ways the line can be crossed.

4. Becoming disengaged from the case
Relying too heavily on support can reduce your own understanding and confidence.

Each of these is understandable.

But each can also weaken your position if not addressed.

Step 15: How This Strengthens Your Case — Not Just Protects It

It is important to recognise that these steps are not simply about avoiding problems.

They actively improve your case.

When you are clearly in control:

• Your credibility with the court increases
• Your submissions are more coherent
• Your responses are more confident
• Your case is more resilient to challenge

Judges are used to dealing with litigants in person.

What they look for is clarity, engagement, and understanding.

A well-structured case demonstrates all three.

Step 16: Confidence Comes From Control

Many litigants assume that confidence comes from having someone else take over.

In reality, the opposite is true.

Confidence comes from understanding your case and being able to explain it.

That only happens when you remain actively involved.

Support should increase your confidence, not replace your role.

Step 17: The Strategic Advantage Most People Miss

There is a misconception that staying within these boundaries limits what you can do.

In practice, it creates an advantage.

When your case is structured properly:

• There is less room for procedural attack
• Your position is clearer and more focused
• The court can engage directly with you

At the same time, you still benefit from support behind the scenes.

This combination—control at the front, structure behind—can be extremely effective.

Step 18: A Final Word on Balance

This is not about drawing rigid lines that make your case harder to manage.

It is about balance.

You should not feel that you are facing proceedings alone.

But equally, you should not feel that your case is being taken out of your hands.

The correct position sits between those two points.

You are supported, but you remain in control.

Final Thoughts

The decision in Mazur has brought clarity to an area that many people did not fully consider.

For litigants in person, that clarity is an opportunity.

It allows you to structure your case in a way that is:

• Compliant
• Robust
• Credible

Most importantly, it ensures that your case is judged on what matters:

The facts, the evidence, and the outcome you are seeking.

Get the structure right, and everything else becomes stronger.

Want to Make Sure Your Case Is Structured Properly?

If you are a litigant in person and want support that strengthens your case while keeping you fully compliant and in control, you can book an initial consultation below.

Regulatory & Editorial Notice: JSH Law Ltd is not a firm of solicitors and does not provide regulated legal services. This article is for general information and commentary only and does not constitute legal advice. Any references to legal cases or third-party practices are provided for public interest analysis and educational purposes.