Every parliamentary written question tabled by Neil Shastri-Hurst this session, with the full answer and department. Back to the MP page.
Showing 1–20 of 45 · Ministry of Justice
When his Department plans to publish the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman's independent review into the use of restraints on pregnant women during hospital escorts between 2021 and 2025.
The Prisons & Probation Ombudsman will publish the report of his investigation once it has concluded. We understand that no publication date has been set at this stage.
Pursuant to the answer to written question 118611, what the policy rationale is for defining a delay under the Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (PECS) contracts, for the purposes of the relevant Contract Delivery Indicator, as arising only "where a Court is prevented from commencing its planned business at the intended start time, and/or it has no other business that can reasonably be rescheduled to undertake instead"; and what assessment his Department has made as to whether that definition adequately captures delays in the transfer of prisoners to court in circumstances where the court is able to proceed with alternative business.
The Prisoner Escort and Custody Service (PECS) contracts require Suppliers to deliver prisoners to court in time for their hearing to avoid loss of court time. Contract Delivery Indicator (CDI)15 therefore measures “Courtroom delay due to Supplier actions resulting in a Prisoner who is the responsibility of the Supplier not being available in the Courtroom at the required Courtroom appearance time and delay to court proceedings”.CDI 15 is structured to take account of the fact that not all prisoners are scheduled to appear at the standard 10:00 commencement time used by the courts. Within the Magistrates’ courts, several prisoners may be listed for hearings at the same time, and courts then determine the running order of cases as required. PECS Suppliers are, therefore, required to transport prisoners in accordance with their individual hearing times and to ensure that they are available when their hearings are due to begin. Where a courtroom is unable to begin proceedings because a prisoner is not available at the required time, this is recorded as a delay. Where the court is able to progress other work in the interim, a contractual delay is not recorded; however, the incident will be logged to support assurance activity.CDI 15 aligns with H M Court and Tribunal Service’s Court Exception Reporting process. Through this process, any delays to court proceedings as a result of late prisoner delivery, regardless of fault, are formally recorded and shared with the PECS Contract Management Team in H M Prison and Probation Service. In addition, suppliers are required to self-report any delays resulting from their actions, to ensure consistency and accuracy in reporting.These contractual mechanisms ensure that performance issues are rigorously captured, transparently monitored, and proportionately addressed. They take account of situations where delays arise owing to factors outside the supplier’s reasonable control, supporting fair and accurate performance assessment, and promoting continuous improvement across the criminal justice system.
What (a) performance standards and (b) key performance indicators on the timeliness of prisoner arrivals at court are set out within the contract for Prisoner Escort and Custody Services.
The Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (PECS) contracts specify that the contractor shall deliver prisoners to court by the required times to ensure the efficient and effective running of courts without delay. The key performance indicator relating to the timeliness of prisoner arrivals in court is Contract Delivery Indicator 15, at Annex 1 to Schedule 5 of the contract.The PECS contracts can be found in the Contracts Finder on the GOV.UK website:Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (Generation 4) - Lot North - Contracts Finder.Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (Generation 4) - Lot South - Contracts Finder.
What the outstanding caseload is in the Crown Court, broken down by offence category and region.
The Ministry of Justice publishes data on the Crown Court open caseload on a quarterly basis in the Criminal Court Statistics publication. The latest available data covers the period up to September 2025 and this can be broken down by offence category and region using the Crown Court receipts, disposals and open cases tool. Criminal court statistics quarterly: July to September 2025 - GOV.UK
How many cases were adjourned due to lack of judicial availability in the last 12 months.
The Ministry of Justice publishes data on trials that are ineffective due to a judge or magistrate not being available. An ineffective trial does not go ahead on the scheduled trial date, and a further listing is required. This information can be found on a quarterly basis using the ‘Trial effectiveness at the criminal courts tool’ and filtering the reason to ‘23. Ineffective reason: Judge/magistrate availability’ at the link below: Criminal court statistics quarterly: July to September 2025 - GOV.UK
When he plans to publish the impact assessment for the removal of the right of defendants to elect for a jury trial.
An impact assessment will accompany our legislative measures, as is usual practice.
How many prisoners have been released in error since 5 July 2024 by prison.
Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government. On 11 November, the Deputy Prime Minister announced a five-point action plan setting out initial steps to address this issue.Totals for releases in error, including a breakdown by releasing prison (or Prisoner Escort Custody Services), are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via HMPPS Annual Digest, April 2024 to March 2025 - GOV.UK , and provide data up to March 2025.The Government is determined to fix the issue of mistaken releases and ensure the public is properly protected.
What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of measures to improve the timeliness of probate claims.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service have invested in more staff, alongside system and process improvements to reduce and maintain lower processing times during the last year.The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness in our regular quarterly family court statistics bulletin: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK
With reference to to the Independent Technical Review of Qualifications and Experience Requirements for the Provision of Spoken Language Interpreting, published on 17 March 2025, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that there will be a sufficient number of Level 6 qualified interpreters available to meet the October 2026 target for court interpreting services.
I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on Tuesday 9 September to Question 74494: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-09-02/74494.
What assessment he has made of the adequacy of existing remuneration rates and contractual terms in attracting and retaining Level 6 qualified interpreters to undertake work in the courts.
I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on Monday 8 September to Question 73394: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-08-29/73394.
Whether his Department plans to introduce a remuneration and conditions framework for court interpreters ahead of the October 2026 target date to support the sustainability of the systems.
I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on Friday 5 September to Question 73395: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-08-29/73395.
How many open family cases there were in each Designated Family Judge area as of 23 July 2025, broken down by (a) public law and (b) private law; and what proportion of those cases involved litigants in person.
The information requested is provided in the data tables below up until 31 March 2025, aligning with the time period published in the Ministry of Justice’s official statistics. All data is taken from HMCTS administrative systems.Caseload data by Designated Family Judge area: Count of the Public Law Open Caseload as at the 31 March 2025 broken down to reflect whether parties to proceedings have legal representation Designated Family Judge AreaBoth Applicant and RespondentApplicant onlyRespondent onlyNeither Applicant nor RespondentTotalBirmingham1901101202Blackburn/Lancaster3042100325Bournemouth and Dorset7620078Brighton2051000215Bristol (A, NS and G)232601239Business Centres00000Carlisle98801107Central London5292012552Cleveland and South Durham2592403286Coventry100700107Derby158400162Devon2462001267East London5351801554Essex and Suffolk3191301332Humberside2201200232Leicester124300127Lincoln96500101Liverpool4935216552Luton119700126Manchester7213703761Medway and Canterbury342502349Milton Keynes140400144North Wales99900108North Yorkshire94502101Northampton98300101Northumbria and North Durham3972608431Norwich100300103Nottingham131700138Peterborough and Cambridge139300142Portsmouth (Hampshire and IOW)1942102217Reading239711248Royal Courts of Justice4400044South East Wales2162503244South Yorkshire2731300286Stoke on Trent1621902183Surrey8940194Swansea1001300113Swindon6310165Taunton99500104Truro6640070Watford8540291West London3851401400West Yorkshire3422903374Wolverhampton2831600299Worcester7660385 England and Wales 9,280 526 3 51 9,860 Count of the Private Law Open Caseload as at the 31 March 2025 broken down to reflect whether parties to proceedings have legal representation Designated Family Judge AreaBoth Applicant and RespondentApplicant onlyRespondent onlyNeither Applicant nor RespondentTotalBirmingham106139113232590Blackburn/Lancaster148208132388876Bournemouth and Dorset425249114257Brighton1282441797341285Bristol (A, NS and G)2232051584581044Business Centres01078Carlisle465839106249Central London3284463389852097Cleveland and South Durham1139290154449Coventry819082164417Derby1078898194487Devon171185170310836East London3464844168812127Essex and Suffolk3053943208941913Humberside7211589232508Leicester111134114273632Lincoln696951112301Liverpool2713002766081455Luton83123114318638Manchester40754842110942470Medway and Canterbury1972922607881537Milton Keynes487273169362North Wales58464255201North Yorkshire797964106328Northampton425358206359Northumbria and North Durham229209159293890Norwich9010499225518Nottingham135189140269733Peterborough and Cambridge119145100357721Portsmouth (Hampshire and IOW)1772692087811435Reading1692622064731110Royal Courts of Justice9042832281831South East Wales8310471179437South Yorkshire115140112203570Stoke on Trent8910181204475Surrey144160125395824Swansea1391266594424Swindon416044196341Taunton736467144348Truro856658170379Watford117162151386816West London4154944059532267West Yorkshire2252801734091087Wolverhampton2262431674051041Worcester787970130357 England and Wales 6,420 8,202 6,279 16,129 37,030 Notes:The HMCTS data provided above is in line with latest MoJ statistics.Self-representation is determined by the field 'legal representation' in Familyman being left blank. Therefore, this is only a proxy measure and parties without a recorded representative are not necessarily self-representing litigants in person.A party is considered 'applicant-represented' if at least one applicant has a recorded representative, and likewise for respondents.The majority of Public law applicants are public bodies with access to their own legal resources - however, this legal representation is often not recorded. To address this we introduced a methodology which assumes that all public body applicants have legal representation.
What steps her Department is taking to ensure that Single Justice Procedure notices are (a) served effectively and (b) received by the intended recipient.
Prosecutors using the Single Justice Procedure (SJP) are responsible for the service of SJP notices and these are presently served by first class post or by email. The Ministry of Justice does not have supervisory functions over SJP prosecutors, and it is the responsibility of the courts and the independent judiciary, to satisfy themselves that SJP notices have been served in accordance with the rules.If a defendant is not aware of the proceedings they can make a statutory declaration which revokes the conviction, and they will then be required to submit a formal written response to the original SJP notice so that the process begins again.The Government acknowledges the criticisms and shortcomings in the operation of the SJP and recognises the importance of ensuring that the SJP is accessible and fair to all defendants. That is why we launched a consultation on the oversight and regulation of private prosecutors which included a chapter on the SJP. The consultation closed on 8 May and work is ongoing to analyse the responses received and look at ways to reform the SJP which improves safeguards and efficiency in the process.
What data his Department holds on the proportion of Single Justice Procedure cases where the defendant did not respond to the notice and was convicted in absence.
The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of defendants who failed to respond to a Single Justice Procedure (SJP) notice and were therefore convicted in absence. Information and statistics on plea response for SJP cases is published here: Statistics in development – Single Justice Procedures – GOV.UK.Defendant engagement is a key part of delivering fair justice. The Ministry of Justice continues to consider ways to support and encourage participation in the SJP process which is why we recently consulted on how the process can be improved. We will set out our plans shortly.
What information her Department holds on the number of first-tier SEND tribunal cases lodged in the most recent year for which data is available; and in how many of those cases was the decision made in favour of the appellant.
Information about registered appeals and outcomes to SEND Tribunals is published at: Tribunals statistics quarterly: July to September 2024 - GOV.UK.
How many qualified legal representatives are there by (a) solicitor and (b) barrister for which the latest data is available.
According to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the number of solicitors on the roll was 209,200 in February 2025, an increase from 202,524 at the end of July 2024. More information can be found via the SRA’s website: https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/regulated-community-statistics/data/population_solicitors. The most recent figures from the Bar Standards Board from 2024 suggest that there were 18,141 practising barristers in England and Wales. More information on the number of practicing barristers in the UK can be accessed via their website: https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/for-the-public/search-a-barristers-record/the-barristers-register.html.
How many family law cases required a qualified legal representative broken down by individual court in the most recent year for which data is available.
Data on the number of family law cases involving cross-examination by litigants in person where there were allegations of abuse is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.Data is not held on the number of qualified legal representatives required by individual court.The Legal Aid Agency publishes data on the number of Qualified Legal Representatives who submit a claim for payment under the QLR Scheme. This information is published on a quarterly basis and can be accessed via the following link. The relevant data can be found in Table 10.1 at column M. Claims for payment are submitted and paid in arrears so the claim may not necessarily be reflective of the period in which work was undertaken.Data is not held on the number of family law cases which were (a) adjourned and (b) delayed due to no qualified legal representative being available in the most recent 12 month period.
How many family law cases were (a) adjourned and (b) delayed due to no qualified legal representative being available in the most recent 12 month period for which data is available.
Data on the number of family law cases involving cross-examination by litigants in person where there were allegations of abuse is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.Data is not held on the number of qualified legal representatives required by individual court.The Legal Aid Agency publishes data on the number of Qualified Legal Representatives who submit a claim for payment under the QLR Scheme. This information is published on a quarterly basis and can be accessed via the following link. The relevant data can be found in Table 10.1 at column M. Claims for payment are submitted and paid in arrears so the claim may not necessarily be reflective of the period in which work was undertaken.Data is not held on the number of family law cases which were (a) adjourned and (b) delayed due to no qualified legal representative being available in the most recent 12 month period.
How many family law cases involving cross-examination by litigants in person where there were allegations of abuse were there in the most recent year for which data is available.
Data on the number of family law cases involving cross-examination by litigants in person where there were allegations of abuse is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.Data is not held on the number of qualified legal representatives required by individual court.The Legal Aid Agency publishes data on the number of Qualified Legal Representatives who submit a claim for payment under the QLR Scheme. This information is published on a quarterly basis and can be accessed via the following link. The relevant data can be found in Table 10.1 at column M. Claims for payment are submitted and paid in arrears so the claim may not necessarily be reflective of the period in which work was undertaken.Data is not held on the number of family law cases which were (a) adjourned and (b) delayed due to no qualified legal representative being available in the most recent 12 month period.
What steps she is taking to improve the retention of coroners.
Whilst the Ministry of Justice has responsibility for coroner and inquest law and policy, coroner services are locally funded and administered by individual local authorities. In line with this framework, coroners are appointed by the lead local authority for a coroner area, with the consent of the Lord Chancellor and the Chief Coroner.In its response to the Justice Committee in December 2024, the Government endorsed the Committee’s view that the coroner service in England and Wales “is staffed with highly skilled and dedicated people performing a difficult but essential service”. We are therefore committed to continuing to work with the Chief Coroner to ensure consistency, high standards and better resilience across coroner services.In addition, we support steps taken by the Chief Coroner to improve the system of regional governance in her office, including enhancing the role of regional leadership coroners and creation of a diversity and inclusion lead and wellbeing lead. These leadership coroners work alongside the Chief Coroner and the deputy Chief Coroners to encourage consistency of approach at a regional level and to support the link between the Chief Coroner, her Office and the coroner judiciary as a whole.