“What is a McKenzie Friend?”

Introduction

In the legal systems of England and Wales, a McKenzie Friend plays a unique and important role in providing support to individuals who represent themselves in court, also known as litigants in person (LiPs). Originating from a 1970 case in the Court of Appeal, the concept of a McKenzie Friend has since developed into a crucial aspect of access to justice, especially in family courts and civil proceedings. While not a lawyer or legally qualified representative, a McKenzie Friend can offer invaluable assistance during court proceedings. This paper explores the definition, legal background, roles, limitations, benefits, and concerns surrounding the use of McKenzie Friends in the UK legal system.

Origin and Legal Background

The term McKenzie Friend comes from the landmark case McKenzie v McKenzie [1970] 3 WLR 472, in which an Australian man representing himself in divorce proceedings was denied assistance from someone who had legal experience but was not qualified to practice in the UK. The Court of Appeal held that the man was entitled to assistance from a non-lawyer, and the principle was thus established: a litigant in person has the right to reasonable assistance from a layperson in court.

This precedent led to what is now widely accepted as the role of a McKenzie Friend. The right to have a McKenzie Friend is supported by the principle of a fair hearing under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), incorporated into UK law through the Human Rights Act 1998.

Role and Responsibilities of a McKenzie Friend

A McKenzie Friend provides moral and practical support to a litigant in person. While they are not allowed to act as legal representatives, their permitted duties include:

  • Taking notes during court hearings

  • Providing quiet advice, suggestions, or reminders during proceedings

  • Assisting with the organisation of documents

  • Helping to identify key legal points and clarify court procedure

  • Offering support in preparation for the case (e.g., drafting documents or statements, though not signing them)

McKenzie Friends are not allowed to address the court (i.e., speak on behalf of the litigant), examine witnesses, or manage the case as a solicitor or barrister would. However, in exceptional circumstances and with the court’s permission, they may be granted the right of audience or allowed to conduct litigation.

Types of McKenzie Friends

McKenzie Friends can be broadly categorised into two types:

  1. Lay McKenzie Friends – These are usually friends, family members, or individuals with no formal legal training who offer support out of goodwill.

  2. Professional McKenzie Friends – These individuals may charge a fee for their services and often have some form of legal experience or background. While they are not regulated as solicitors or barristers, some professional McKenzie Friends operate under voluntary codes of conduct and are members of organisations such as the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends.

Legal Guidance and Judicial Discretion

Courts generally allow the presence of a McKenzie Friend, but the final decision rests with the judge. According to guidance issued by the Judicial Executive Board in 2010, a judge may refuse a McKenzie Friend if:

  • Their behaviour disrupts the proceedings

  • They are found to be acting inappropriately or giving misleading advice

  • They are not acting in the interests of justice

  • Confidentiality or other ethical issues are raised

Permission can be revoked at any stage if the McKenzie Friend acts improperly.

Benefits of Using a McKenzie Friend

The presence of a McKenzie Friend offers several advantages:

  • Accessibility: Many individuals cannot afford legal representation; McKenzie Friends provide a low-cost alternative.

  • Emotional Support: Court proceedings can be overwhelming; having a familiar or supportive person helps relieve stress.

  • Practical Help: Assisting with documents and notes allows litigants to focus on presenting their case effectively.

  • Improved Justice Outcomes: In many instances, the presence of a McKenzie Friend can lead to a more balanced and fair presentation of facts.

Criticism and Controversy

Despite their benefits, McKenzie Friends are not without controversy. Key concerns include:

  • Lack of Regulation: Professional McKenzie Friends are not subject to oversight by regulatory bodies such as the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which can lead to issues of accountability.

  • Quality of Advice: Some McKenzie Friends, particularly those who charge for their services, may lack sufficient knowledge of the law and court procedures, potentially causing harm.

  • Conflicts of Interest: Ethical issues may arise, especially where financial incentives are involved.

  • Judicial Burden: Judges may have to spend additional time managing proceedings where McKenzie Friends misunderstand court protocol or attempt to overstep their role.

The Future of McKenzie Friends

There has been increasing debate over whether McKenzie Friends should be regulated more strictly. Proposals have included introducing a licensing scheme for paid McKenzie Friends or formally banning them from charging fees. However, opponents of regulation argue that over-restriction would reduce access to justice for the many litigants who rely on affordable support.

In 2016, the Lord Chief Justice’s Report proposed a ban on fee-charging McKenzie Friends in family courts, citing the risks of poor legal advice and the potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals. As of 2025, no national ban has been implemented, but courts remain cautious about allowing fee-charging McKenzie Friends without close scrutiny.

Conclusion

A McKenzie Friend serves a vital role in the UK legal system by supporting self-represented litigants in navigating complex and often intimidating court proceedings. While they do not replace the expertise of a qualified solicitor or barrister, McKenzie Friends provide a much-needed bridge between professional legal services and complete self-representation. As legal aid becomes more limited and court cases grow more complex, the role of McKenzie Friends is likely to remain relevant—but careful consideration must be given to quality, accountability, and ethics to protect both litigants and the integrity of the justice system.