A landmark on legal services regulation, access to justice, and the practical operation of law firms. The intervener list alone tells you the significance: CILEX, APIL, the Law Centres Network, and the Legal Services Board. #LegalServicesAct #Litigation #AccessToJustice
This matters for every law firm in the country. The previous position meant routine delegation — a clerk issuing proceedings, a paralegal serving a claim form — was technically criminal. The Court has confirmed what most of the profession assumed was the law all along.
The Court held that “carry on” means directing, controlling, and being responsible for litigation — not simply doing the tasks. Where a solicitor delegates to a paralegal and retains responsibility, it is the solicitor who carries on the conduct of litigation. The paralegal commits no offence.
The question: does an unauthorised person “carry on the conduct of litigation” under the Legal Services Act 2007 if they perform litigation tasks under a solicitor's supervision? Sheldon J said yes. The Law Society and SRA agreed. The Court of Appeal, unanimously, has said they were all wrong.
Until this morning, paralegals issuing claim forms without a solicitor's specific prior approval were technically committing a criminal offence. The Court of Appeal has just changed that. Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2026] EWCA Civ 369, handed down today by the Master of the Rolls.
🔊The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has brought its first ever #McMafia Order vs 85 luxury London properties worth over £81m. It’s great to see the CPS using #UnexplainedWealthOrders which require Su Jiangbo- the owner of the properties according to the media - to explain the origin of his wealth.
Update: The Times and OCCRP have identified “Mr X” as Su Jiangbo, a Chinese national wanted in Fujian province for allegedly running illegal gambling operations. He began buying London property weeks before being placed on a wanted list — and continued for nearly two years.
💰 Major new #McMafia order case revealed as the National Crime Agency fends off a challenge to an Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) targeting 2 properties worth £5m and £800k in cash. The investigative tool was used against an anonymised woman connected to a $2bn money laundering scandal in Singapore.
UWOs remain underused but increasingly effective. For anyone involved in asset recovery, anti-corruption, or financial crime, this area of law is moving fast. #UWO #AssetRecovery #POCA #FinancialCrime
Faisal Osman of chambers acted for the CPS alongside Andrew Sutcliffe KC of 3VB. Asset recovery under POCA — including UWOs, freezing orders, and civil recovery — is a core part of what we do. These orders are being used more frequently and to greater effect.
£81 million across 85 London flats is a significant portfolio. The Interim Freezing Order ensures nothing moves while the UWO runs its course. The CPS Proceeds of Crime Division led the investigation, supported by the Metropolitan Police.
UWOs are one of the most powerful tools in the asset recovery toolkit. They reverse the burden: instead of the state proving the assets are dirty, the respondent must show they are clean. If they cannot, the property is liable to civil recovery under POCA 2002.
The CPS has obtained an Unexplained Wealth Order and Interim Freezing Order over 85 properties across central and south London, valued at more than £81 million. The respondent now has three months to explain where the money came from. Faisal Osman of chambers acted for the CPS.
We look forward to sharing future editions and continuing the conversation around developments in proceeds of crime and asset forfeiture work.
Read the full newsletter here: www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/cms/document...
Hard to imagine a judge sitting alone reaching the same result. Whether that troubles you or reassures you probably says a lot about where you stand on the Courts and Tribunals Bill. That is either the problem with juries or the whole point of them.
The defendants did not deny what they did. But a jury is not a machine. It is twelve people bringing their collective conscience into the room. Sometimes that conscience says: what you did was technically wrong, but we will not convict you for it. That is jury equity. It is meant to exist.
It was the fourth trial from the same incident. Two juries convicted. Two acquitted. Same facts, same law, same defences. Four groups of twelve ordinary people, asked the same question, split down the middle.
Beagle-napping is hardly our wheelhouse. But a case at Peterborough Crown Court this month made us think about what juries really mean to our system of criminal justice. Five activists broke into a facility breeding beagles for lab testing, took 18 puppies, and admitted doing so. The jury acquitted.
With 240 active investigations, this is not theoretical. If you are unsure about your sanctions exposure, the time to find out is before OFSI does — not after. #Sanctions #OFSI #FinancialCrime #Compliance
There is a carrot as well as a stick. If you discover a breach and self-report promptly, cooperate, and settle early, you can access discounts of up to 70% on the penalty. The old maximum discount for voluntary disclosure was 50% — it is now 30%, but stacks with other reductions.
Fines are going up. The maximum penalty is set to double to the greater of £2m or 100% of the breach value. New fixed penalties of £5,000 and £10,000 now apply for failing to report or comply with licensing conditions. These are strict liability. No intent required.
OFSI — the body that enforces UK financial sanctions — has just overhauled its enforcement framework. If you are a business, a compliance officer, or someone who thinks sanctions are someone else's problem, it is worth paying attention. Here is why.
Whether this is pragmatism or a dilution of deterrence will depend on who you ask. But the Act is now law, and for anyone practising in fraud or financial crime, the sentencing landscape has just shifted. #SentencingAct2026 #CriminalLaw #FraudLaw
Important detail: the presumption only applies where the defendant is convicted on or after today, 22 March 2026. Not sentenced — convicted. So the timing of a guilty plea or verdict now carries an additional layer of significance.
For sentences of 12 months or less, there is now a presumption of suspension — the court must suspend unless there are exceptional circumstances. For anyone working in fraud, money laundering, or regulatory crime, where sentences often fall in this range, that changes the calculus.
The Sentencing Act 2026 comes into force today. If you practise in criminal law and have not read it yet, now would be a good time. The headline: courts can now suspend custodial sentences of up to 3 years. That is a significant shift.
Jury trial is not a procedural nicety — it is a constitutional safeguard, especially in serious fraud and financial crime. If the Bill passes in its current form, that protection disappears for some of the most consequential cases in the criminal calendar. #JuryTrials #FraudLaw
3,200 lawyers have written to the PM. Nearly 40 Labour MPs may rebel. The Criminal Bar Association is fundamentally opposed. Whatever you think about court backlogs, this is not a reform the profession has asked for or the evidence supports.
The government says it will make fraud trials 20% faster. Perhaps. But the Institute for Government found the overall impact on the backlog would be around 2%. That is a modest return for abolishing a right that has existed since Magna Carta.
The offences caught are not trivial. Fraud, conspiracy to defraud, money laundering, bribery, insider dealing, terrorist financing. These are cases where defendants face years in prison. And under this Bill, a judge could decide they do not get a jury.