Ministry of Justice

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) holds required staffing levels which are subject to regular amendment and managed at a local and regional level. As a result of this discretion, HMPPS does not present vacancy data due to variability in required staffing levels.

We do, however, publish indicative vacancies in the HMPPS Workforce and the most recently published figures can be found via the following link: HM Prison & Probation Service workforce quarterly: December 2025 - GOV.UK.

His Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) currently deploys 492 licensed search dogs across prisons in England and Wales. These dogs form a key part of the Department’s approach to tackling the supply of illicit items, including drugs, mobile telephones and other contraband, and are used proactively across the estate.

Decisions on deployment, and any increase in search dog capacity, are made at local and regional level, enabling prisons to respond flexibly to their specific security risks and operational challenges. This includes the ability to scale up provision where intelligence or demand indicates a need.

HMPPS keeps this capability under regular review as part of its wider security strategy and will continue to assess whether additional resources are required to meet any emerging threats.

This capability is being implemented on a phased basis, reflecting the complexity of introducing Conducted Energy Devices (generally known as TASERs) safely into the prison environment. Initial enabling activity is under way, including development of policy and operating procedures, assurance processes, training design, and engagement with key stakeholders.

Training and equipping of staff will be delivered incrementally, with cohorts authorised to access the equipment in stages, once the necessary governance, infrastructure and safeguards are in place.

In view of the need to prioritise safety, operational readiness and learning from early phases of implementation, it would not be appropriate at this stage to set a deadline for completion. Progress will continue to be monitored closely to ensure progress is maintained.

Coroners are independent judges, but operational responsibility for coroner services lies with the lead local authorities which fund and administer of each of the 74 coroner areas in England and Wales. Whist the framework of accountability in the coronial jurisdiction is therefore complex, it is nevertheless robust and transparent.

Complaints about the standard of service provided in the context of a coroner’s investigation should be raised in the first instance with the coroner’s office and/or with the funding local authority. If the complainant remains dissatisfied, the matter can be reported to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (https://www.lgo.org.uk/make-a-complaint), which aims to provide a remedy to complaints through impartial and fair investigation.

The Ombudsman cannot investigate a coroner’s decisions as an independent judge. However, these can be challenged through the judicial review process or, in some circumstances, by applying to the Attorney General for leave to apply to the High Court for a fresh inquest.

Complaints about the personal conduct of coroners should be made to the independent Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/).

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

Under this Government the Ministry of Justice has not provided funding, paid consultancy fees, or entered into formal engagement contracts with external organisations in developing revised domestic abuse guidance or safeguarding processes in private law children cases.

The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.

All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.

The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.

All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.

The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.

All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.

To answer the question would incur disproportionate cost as it would require a search of individual prisoner records. Centrally-collated data on prisoner transfers cover transfers between a predominant function closed prison and a predominant function open prison but does not distinguish instances of prisoner movements between a ‘closed’ wing and an ‘open’ wing where a prison has both types of function. Therefore, this would require a search of individual prisoner records.

Public protection remains the priority and prisoners will only be transferred to open conditions if it is assessed that it is safe to do so.

The number of officers trained in Operation Tornado control and restraint procedures, as of 31 March 2026, and the percentage of operational staff that these staff represent, are set out in the attached table.

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Cafcass does not record structured data in its complaints case management system to enable reporting on how many complaints have been made against Cafcass in each of the last five years alleging (a) discrimination and (b) bias against fathers; and how many such complaints were upheld.

This information is not recorded centrally, and the data would only be available from individual case file review at a disproportionate cost.

The Government recognises the importance of reducing offending, including violent reoffending, among children who are on bail through close supervision and high levels of support by skilled staff. We are investing £5 million over the next three years in strengthening the bail packages available for children, so that courts have access to more robust community-based options that both support children to make positive changes and help manage the risk of offending. We are also reforming the annual youth remand funding arrangements to further support greater local authority investment in high-quality community alternatives to custodial remand, including suitable community placements (specialist fostering and accommodation), family support and enhanced Bail Intensive Supervision and Support services. This builds on the Greater Manchester Youth Remand Funding pilot, which has demonstrated promising early findings in improving their bail and community remand offer regionally, to keep children and communities safe. We are now offering multi-year funding to local authorities to scale up this regional model, encouraging areas to collaborate in developing a broader range of bail support options to meet the needs of children and protect the public.

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

This Government is deeply committed to the principle of open justice and transparency, ensuring that our justice system is both accountable and accessible to the public.

In the context of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), ahead of the commencement of Phase 1 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) is currently undertaking the necessary preparations to ensure that robust data can be collected regarding open market rent applications. This includes monitoring the average timescales for the Tribunal to manage these applications from receipt to determination.

There is no central data available on the number of people who have paid court fines. It would be necessary to interrogate all records manually. This information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Financial penalties imposed by the courts will often consist of multiple elements including, amongst others, compensation, victim surcharge, prosecutor’s costs and a fine. The imposition is enforced as a whole, and any receipts received are applied to the offender’s account in accordance with a strict legal hierarchy. This ensures that the victims receive any monies they are due first, with the fine element being the last to be collected. This can result in the fine element, which is the punitive element of an imposition taking longer to be paid.

The Government takes the recovery and enforcement of all financial impositions very seriously and remains committed to ensuring impositions are paid. The courts will do everything within their powers to trace those who do not pay and use a variety of sanctions to ensure the recovery of criminal fines and financial penalties. These sanctions can include deducting money from an individual offender’s earnings or benefits, if they are unemployed, or issuing warrants instructing approved enforcement agents to seize and sell goods belonging to the offender. If the offender does not pay as ordered and the money cannot be recovered by other means, then the court can take other actions which includes sending them to prison for non-payment of the financial penalty including a fine.

The value of outstanding fines is reported annually in the HMCTS Trust Statement, the information can be found on page 35 in table 4, using the link below, the outstanding value at 31 March 2025 was £1,139,192,851 We anticipate the data for the 31 March 2026 being published in July 2026.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service Trust Statement 2024-25

The specific information requested is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective due to the prosecution failing to disclose unused evidence is published quarterly in the Criminal Courts Accredited Official Statistics. The latest available data can be found in the ‘Trial Effectiveness at the Criminal Courts tool’ here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: October to December 2025 - GOV.UK.

The Government is carefully considering the recommendations on the disclosure regime made by Sir Brian Leveson as part of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts, and by Jonathan Fisher KC in his Independent Review of Disclosure Offences.

No specific assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber in resolving park home disputes. However, the Ministry of Justice regularly considers the performance of tribunals more widely. Statistics are published on a quarterly basis and can be found at: htpps://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

The Department complies with the ongoing Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the potential equality impacts of decisions to make changes to the provision of education in prisons at both a national and local level. Changes to planned core education hours vary across different prisons because the national funding formula for prison education has been refreshed, to ensure that allocations are a fair reflection of prison population, function and regional cost differences. Governors and Heads of Education, Skills and Work undertake needs analysis to understand the characteristics and needs of their local prison population, and commission education based on this information. New Core Education contracts also have strengthened requirements around Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Providers are required to adhere to the Public Sector Equality Duty, and must continuously maintain an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion action plan to ensure equity of access to learning.

Data on the number of people serving custodial sentences for terrorist offences are published by the Home Office as part of its quarterly statistical bulletin Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequent legislation: Arrests, outcomes, and stop and search, Great Britain, which is available at: Operation of police powers under TACT 2000, to December 2025 - GOV.UK

Details of the risk classification are withheld on the grounds of national security.

The Joint Extremism Unit also monitors and assesses individuals who have not been convicted of terrorism or terrorism-connected offences, but nevertheless represent terrorist risk. Data regarding these individuals are also withheld on national security grounds.

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

The Government does not have plans to commission an independent review of the work of Cafcass.

Cafcass operates independently and is subject to robust oversight and assurance arrangements, in line with the Arms-Length Body Code of Practice and its Framework Document with the Ministry of Justice.

Cafcass is also regularly inspected by Ofsted and was rated “outstanding” at its most recent full inspection in January 2024. The key findings of the Ofsted report are available here. Ofsted has also undertaken more recent focused work, including on private law cases involving domestic abuse, with findings published in October 2025, which are published here.

The Government expects Cafcass to ensure that all children and families are treated fairly and impartially, and that recommendations to the courts are based on the best interests of the child.

Cafcass does not record structured data in its case management system to enable the identification of the proportion of private-law children's cases in which a recommendation was made to pause or restrict a father’s contact following an allegation of domestic abuse prior to the completion of fact-finding proceedings. This information is not recorded centrally, and the data would only be available from individual case file review at a disproportionate cost.

The Cafcass safeguarding and domestic abuse policies are clear that where existing contact arrangements are considered unsafe for children, advice will be given to the court that the contact ceases whilst an assessment of harm and risk of further harm is considered as part of the safeguarding and/or work after the first hearing.

This Government engages with a wide range of stakeholders across the family justice sector to inform policy development.

Further information on meetings between Ministers, senior officials and external organisations is published in the Department’s quarterly transparency returns, in accordance with the Government’s transparency requirements. These are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/moj-gifts-hospitality-travel-and-meetings.

Prisons in the Overseas Territories are subject to the local laws and constitutions of each Territory. The Ministry of Justice works with the Overseas Territories to help align the treatment of prisoners with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules).

The standards the Overseas Territories operate under are not directly equivalent to those applied to the UK because HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP), England and Wales has no formal jurisdiction in the Overseas Territories and the UK is a signatory to relevant international obligations, such as the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture, which the Overseas Territories are not.

HM Prison & Probation Service is committed to equipping up to 10,000 staff with protective body armour by March 2027. Work is continuing to support delivery against this commitment, ensuring it is implemented in a controlled and proportionate manner, with appropriate governance and oversight in place.

The Ministry of Justice works closely with emergency services throughout the planning, construction and mobilisation phases of all new prison builds and expansions.

New prisons are designed with robust security measures, including full CCTV coverage. Expansion teams work with existing prisons to ensure full CCTV coverage of new buildings and associated spaces.

There are no plans for the Ministry of Justice to expand the provision of speed cameras near new prison or expansion sites; the installation and management of speed cameras is a matter for the relevant local authorities and the police.

The Ministry of Justice works closely with other government departments and local services, including emergency services, throughout all phases of new prison builds and expansions.

Decisions regarding the allocation of police resources is a matter for Chief Constables and directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners, or their equivalents. They are best placed to make these decisions based on their knowledge of local need, experience, and in line with their existing budget.

Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) for prisoners serving life sentences is subject to particularly stringent risk assessment and senior decision making, and is granted only in limited circumstances, with public protection as the paramount consideration.

Data on prisoners serving life sentences who are released on ROTL are published regularly in the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly, which include information on the number of individuals serving life sentences released on ROTL, by year: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.

Data on supervised ROTL is not included within centrally collated statistical data or published ROTL figures. As a result, a breakdown of life sentence prisoners released on ROTL by supervised / unsupervised ROTL and offence would only be possible to obtain at disproportionate cost.

The Government recognises that probate applications are made at a difficult and emotional time for bereaved families and it is important that the service is delivered as efficiently as possible.

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has significantly improved processing times, with most applications now processed within published service standards. While some cases take longer, this is often due to the complexity of the estate or where further information is required from personal representatives.

There are no current plans to introduce a general compensation scheme for delays. HMCTS keeps performance continually under review and has an established complaints process to consider any concerns on a case-by-case basis.

The Government recognises that probate applications are made at a difficult and emotional time for bereaved families and it is important that the service is delivered as efficiently as possible.

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has significantly improved processing times, with most applications now processed within published service standards. While some cases take longer, this is often due to the complexity of the estate or where further information is required from personal representatives.

There are no current plans to introduce a general compensation scheme for delays. HMCTS keeps performance continually under review and has an established complaints process to consider any concerns on a case-by-case basis.

The Ministry of Justice publish regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in our quarterly family court statistics bulletin: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service has invested in more staff in 2026, alongside system, process improvements and a programme of upskilling to improve the processing time for applications and maintain the low level of outstanding caseload.