Conducting litigation: the limit of direct access most people miss

When people discover they can hire a barrister directly, without going through a solicitor, the relief is often immediate. They assume they have found a faster, cheaper route to expert legal help, and in many situations they have. But there is a boundary that catches many people off guard, and it is worth understanding it clearly before you instruct anyone: most barristers are not authorised to conduct litigation, and that distinction has real, practical consequences for how your case is handled.

What does “conducting litigation” actually mean?

The phrase sounds technical, but the underlying idea is straightforward. Conducting litigation refers to a specific set of procedural steps that are formally defined in law. These include issuing a claim at court, serving documents on the other side in accordance with court rules, filing applications, and generally taking responsibility for the procedural management of proceedings on behalf of a client.

Under the Legal Services Act 2007, conducting litigation is a reserved legal activity. That means only someone who is authorised to carry it out, by their regulator, can lawfully do so on behalf of another person. For solicitors, authorisation to conduct litigation is a standard part of their practising certificate. For barristers, it is not.

Barristers are regulated by the Bar Standards Board. Their default authorisation covers advocacy (speaking in court), advising, and drafting documents. Unless a barrister has specifically applied for and been granted extended rights, they are not authorised to conduct litigation. The majority of barristers practising today have not sought those extended rights, because historically the structure of legal work in England and Wales assumed a solicitor would always handle the procedural layer while the barrister focused on advocacy.

So what happens in a direct access case?

When you instruct a direct access barrister, you gain access to genuine expert legal advice, skilled drafting, and, where the case goes to a hearing, professional advocacy in court. What you do not get, in most cases, is someone to manage the procedural side of proceedings on your behalf.

That means if you need to issue a claim at court, file a defence, serve documents on the other side, or comply with court deadlines for procedural steps, you will typically need to do those things yourself. Your barrister will tell you what needs to be done, when it needs to be done, and often how to do it. Many direct access barristers are experienced at guiding clients through these steps in plain language. But the formal act of filing at court, and taking responsibility for procedural compliance, sits with you as the litigant in person.

For many types of work, this is entirely manageable. Responding to a contractual dispute, preparing for a hearing at an employment tribunal, or dealing with a family matter in a court that has well-established procedures for litigants in person, these are all situations where a direct access barrister can do the substantive legal work while you handle the administrative steps with their guidance.

For more procedurally intensive or technically complex disputes, particularly multi-track civil litigation where procedural missteps can have serious consequences, this arrangement requires more confidence and attention from the client. It is worth being honest with yourself about that before you proceed.

The barristers who can do more

A small but growing number of barristers have applied for, and been granted, extended rights to conduct litigation. These practitioners can take on the procedural management of your case in the same way a solicitor would. They can issue proceedings on your behalf, handle service, and manage the ongoing procedural obligations of litigation.

If you need that fuller level of service, it is entirely achievable through direct access. You simply need to check, when you are selecting a barrister, whether they hold litigation rights. This is not something to guess at. Ask directly, or look for it stated on their profile. A barrister who holds litigation rights will usually make it clear, because it is a meaningful part of the service they can offer.

At Barrister Link, you can search for practitioners by area and, where relevant, filter for those with extended capabilities. If you are unsure what level of service your situation requires, the barrister you speak to should be able to tell you quickly.

When a solicitor is the better route

Direct access is a genuinely useful option for many legal problems, but it is not the right answer for every situation, and an honest guide should say so.

If your case involves complex ongoing litigation, with multiple parties, extensive disclosure obligations, tight procedural timetables, and high stakes if something goes wrong procedurally, the full service model of a solicitor and barrister working together often remains the appropriate choice. The solicitor manages the procedural machinery and the ongoing client relationship, while the barrister focuses on the legal arguments and any hearings. The cost is higher, but so is the support.

Similarly, if you are not confident managing administrative steps under pressure, or if your health, circumstances, or the nature of the dispute means the burden of acting as a litigant in person would be too great, that matters. The legal system does make some allowance for litigants in person, but courts expect procedural compliance, and the consequences of missing a filing deadline or serving documents incorrectly can be severe.

There is no shame in concluding that a full-service instruction is the better fit. A direct access barrister who gives you an honest initial assessment may well tell you the same thing.

What the practical workflow looks like

For cases where direct access is appropriate, the working relationship typically runs along these lines. You instruct the barrister and provide them with the relevant documents and background. They advise you on the strength of your position, what arguments are available to you, and what the procedural route looks like. They draft the key documents: statements of case, witness statements, skeleton arguments, letters before action.

You then take those documents and file or serve them as directed. Your barrister tells you which court to file at, what fee applies, how service should be effected, and what the deadlines are. If a hearing is listed, your barrister appears and argues your case. If you need to respond to something from the other side, you send it to your barrister, they advise or draft, and you action the response.

It requires engagement from you, but it is far less mysterious than many people expect. Courts have official guides for litigants in person, court staff can assist with procedural questions (though not legal advice), and the filing process for many types of claim is now largely online.

The fees you pay under this model typically cover only the barrister’s time. There are no solicitor fees, no file management charges, and no ongoing retainer. Barristers working on a direct access basis often quote fixed fees for defined pieces of work, an advice note, a set of pleadings, a hearing. This transparency is one of the genuine advantages of the model, though fees vary considerably depending on the complexity of the matter, the seniority of the barrister, and the time involved.

Before you instruct: the right questions to ask

When you make an initial approach to a direct access barrister, it is worth being clear about what stage your dispute is at. Is a claim already issued? Has the other side filed a defence? Is there a hearing date? Or are you at an early stage, still working out whether to pursue the matter at all?

The answers shape what service you need. A barrister giving early advice or drafting a pre-action letter does not need litigation rights. A barrister stepping into live proceedings partway through, where filing may be required, does. Being upfront about your situation from the start means you get an accurate picture of what is possible and what it will cost.

If you are ready to speak to someone, you can make a free initial enquiry to be matched with a barrister who practises in the relevant area. Many direct access barristers offer a short introductory call, so you can get a sense of whether direct access is right for your situation before committing to anything.

The conducting-litigation boundary is one of those things that sounds more complicated than it is in practice. Once you understand it, it rarely prevents people from getting the expert help they need. It simply shapes how the work is divided between you and your barrister, and knowing that from the outset puts you in a much stronger position to make a confident decision.