The Mazur ruling and the illegal activities of corporate council staff

As we know, councils have issued bulk council tax summonses for years without proper judicial oversight, in direct contradiction of case law like Catlin.
Now the involvement of non-qualified staff at the council is called into question  by virtue of the Mazur - because only qualified individuals can carry out reserved legal activities, like preparing and signing summonses applications.
If councils or their contractors are using unqualified staff to process summonses, the entire enforcement process may be legally invalid.
This isn’t just administrative failure — it’s a breakdown of the rule of law and equality before it.
The legal system has long been weaponised against ordinary people, and it's time we called it out.
Read the full piece and decide for yourself: is justice being served? Or is justice a big fat (fraudulent) joke?

https://open.substack.com/pub/clarewillsharrison/p/the-recent-mazur-ruling-indirectly

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/commentary-and-opinion/what-the-high-courts-mazur-ruling-means-for-non-qualified-staff/5124624.article

Freedom of Information Request – Court Officer Authorisation

Dear FOI Officer,

Under Section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please confirm the following in relation to [full name], who has acted or been referred to as a “Court Officer” in Council Tax liability order proceedings:

1.Whether this person has ever held any legal qualification or Practising Certificate issued by the SRA, Bar Standards Board, or CILEX, as required for authorised persons under Sections 12–13 of the Legal Services Act 2007.

2. Whether this person was authorised under any law or regulation to prepare, sign or submit legal documents (e.g. summonses or liability order applications) to the Magistrates’ Court, and if so, under which provision.

3. Whether this person was authorised to represent the Council before the Magistrates’ Court, and if so, under which section of the Legal Services Act 2007, including any claimed exemption under Schedule 3.

Please also confirm whether the Council has considered the implications of the High Court ruling in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) regarding unqualified persons conducting reserved legal activities, and in what way this has been addressed or implemented.

If any part of this information is withheld, please specify the exemption relied upon under Section 17(1) FOIA.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]