Asked by: Siobhain McDonagh (Labour - Mitcham and Morden)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the unused court capacity was in each year since 2015.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
HMCTS had the following number of sessions recorded as either available or unavailable since 2015:
Period | Available verified sessions | Unavailable verified sessions |
FY 15-16 | 1,552,490 | 42,692 |
FY 16-17 | 1,512,424 | 36,811 |
FY 17-18 | 1,387,270 | 37,598 |
FY 18-19 | 1,347,648 | 36,507 |
FY 19-20 | 1,302,006 | 38,408 |
FY 20-21 | 1,062,856 | 130,071 |
FY 21-22 | 1,277,033 | 86,511 |
FY 22-23 | 1,277,981 | 42,665 |
FY 23-24 | 1,281,838 | 48,201 |
A ‘session’ represents the time that court/hearing room space is available, with up to two sessions available each day. Available and unavailable sessions are recorded for all jurisdictions.
HMCTS record a session being unavailable for a number of reasons, including important alternative uses. For example:
HMCTS’ Courtroom Planner performance database was introduced in April 2015 to collect information on the availability of courtrooms. The data was suspended in April 2020 due to COVID disruption and resumed in September 2020. The data between April and August 2020 is therefore incomplete.
The amount of time we use our available estate for hearings is also connected to the funded number of sitting days in any one year, and the availability of key participants such as judiciary and legal professionals.
To maintain session levels, we are investing £220m in the two years to March 2025 for essential maintenance and repair work across the estate to ensure we are keeping as many courtrooms open as possible to hear more cases. This two-year capital maintenance allocation enables us to plan major estate projects in advance and with certainty. Maintenance funding is prioritised to sites that need it most, and this investment is a step forward in improving the quality of the court estate. We have a planned pipeline of future works to improve the resilience and quality of the court estate, and this is kept under regular review.
We have also introduced additional measures to speed up justice for victims and improve the justice system, including:
o Extending 20 Nightingale courtrooms beyond March 2024 to provide additional capacity in the court estate.
o Investing in judicial recruitment since 2017 which has resulted in the annual recruitment of approximately 1000 judges and tribunal members across all jurisdictions. In particular, this has led to an overall increase in the number of judges in the Crown Court.
Please note all data provided is internal and subject to data quality issues inherent in any large-scale manual system.
Asked by: Siobhain McDonagh (Labour - Mitcham and Morden)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of court trials for (a) rape, (b) sexual assault, (c) violence against a person, (d) murder, (e) theft, (f) possession of weapons and (g) fraud have been delayed each year since 2010.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We have interpreted your request as relating to ineffective trials, which is where the trial does not take place on the day as planned and requires rescheduling. Ineffective trials happen for a variety of reasons, such as the absence of a defendant or a witness or adjournment requests from either the prosecution or defence.
The tables attached set out the data held by the Ministry of Justice on ineffective trials broken down by offence type, in volume and as a proportion of the total listed trials for that offence type. Crown Court data is available from 2014 onwards.
The pandemic created a significant challenge for the Crown Court and affected its ability to effectively list trials. As a result, the ineffective trial rate notably increased in 2020, primarily due to increases in defendant illness or absence, and overlisting (55% of all ineffective trials were for these reasons combined).
Since 2022, the proportion of ineffective trials in the Crown Court for all offences increased significantly as a result of the Criminal Bar Assocation (CBA) action. While the ineffective trial rate reduced swiftly following the conclusion of the CBA action, in the most recent available data published by the MoJ (October-December 2023), the defence or prosecution not being ready was the largest reason for ineffective trials, accounting for 22% (450) of all ineffective trials.
Despite the overall increase in ineffective trials since the pandemic and subsequent CBA action, the latest data shows cases progressed through the Crown Court more quickly throughout 2023, with the median time from receipt to completion reducing from 167 days in the first quarter of 2023, to 125 days in the last quarter.
Asked by: Darren Jones (Labour - Bristol North West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 26 March 2024 to Question 19426 on Immigration: Appeals, how many appeals were made before the (a) First and (b) Upper Tribunal between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2023; how many and what proportion of these appeals were successful; and what the total cost to the public purse was for these appeals.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Information about appeal receipts in the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) is routinely published within Tribunals Statistics Quarterly in the main tables. The total number of receipts to the First-tier Tribunal is available in table FIA_1 and for the Upper Tribunal in UIA_1.
The proportion of appeals for the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal which were successful is also available as published data and can be found in tables FIA_3 and UIA_3 respectively.
The latest quarterly data includes figures to December 2023 and is available here: Tribunals statistics quarterly: October to December 2023 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). Data for the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) receipts, disposals and outcome figures is available up to Q1, April to June 2021. Data from Q2 2021/22 onwards have not been included in this publication as data was migrated to a new IT system and the data is not yet available.
Financial information is published for the IAC on an annual basis in the HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) Annual Report, within the fees and charges section. Published information relates to the expenditure and fee income of HMCTS and will not cover financial impacts on other public bodies. Fees and costs cannot be reliably attributed to a particular cohort of appeals. The most recent available data is for Financial Year 2022/23 and is published here HMCTS annual reports and plans - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Community Accommodation Service Tier 3 programme in ensuring prison leavers find settled accommodation following up to 12 weeks of temporary accommodation.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HMPPS Community Accommodation Service (CAS) provides transitional accommodation via three tiers of support, each focused on a different cohort. CAS3 was launched in July 2021, providing up to 12 weeks’ guaranteed accommodation on release for those leaving prison at risk of homelessness, with support to move on to settled accommodation. Initially implemented in five probation regions (Yorkshire and the Humber; North West; Greater Manchester; East of England; and Kent, Surrey and Sussex), the service was rolled out to Wales in June 2022. From April 2023, the CAS3 service was operating in all probation regions in England and Wales. By January 2023, the proportion of offenders housed on the first night of their release from custody was 7.6 percentage points higher in CAS3 regions versus non-CAS3 regions.
We are undertaking an evaluation of the impact of CAS3 on offenders’ obtaining settled accommodation and employment, and on re-offending outcomes. The report is due to be published in the autumn.
The National Audit Office’s report “Improving resettlement support for prison leavers to reduce reoffending”, published in May 2023, looks at the impact of CAS3 on accommodation outcomes during the period up to February 2023. It can be accessed via the following link:
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of prison leavers went on to live in settled accommodation after using the Community Accommodation Service Tier 3 in the most recent period for which figures are available.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HMPPS Community Accommodation Service (CAS) provides transitional accommodation via three tiers of support, each focused on a different cohort. CAS3 was launched in July 2021, providing up to 12 weeks’ guaranteed accommodation on release for those leaving prison at risk of homelessness, with support to move on to settled accommodation. Initially implemented in five probation regions (Yorkshire and the Humber; North West; Greater Manchester; East of England; and Kent, Surrey and Sussex), the service was rolled out to Wales in June 2022. From April 2023, the CAS3 service was operating in all probation regions in England and Wales. By January 2023, the proportion of offenders housed on the first night of their release from custody was 7.6 percentage points higher in CAS3 regions versus non-CAS3 regions.
We are undertaking an evaluation of the impact of CAS3 on offenders’ obtaining settled accommodation and employment, and on re-offending outcomes. The report is due to be published in the autumn.
The National Audit Office’s report “Improving resettlement support for prison leavers to reduce reoffending”, published in May 2023, looks at the impact of CAS3 on accommodation outcomes during the period up to February 2023. It can be accessed via the following link:
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to help ensure prison leavers do not become homeless upon release.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is committed to preventing homelessness and works closely with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and the Welsh Government to do so. Prisons and probation have a statutory duty to refer someone at risk of homelessness to a local authority for assistance, and we have worked closely with DLUHC on the design and delivery of their Accommodation for Ex-Offenders scheme. We have set up a Cross-Whitehall Accommodation Board, attended by officials from MoJ, HMPPS, Welsh Government and DLUHC, to ensure collaboration across policy and operational areas. In the year to March 2023, 86% of prison leavers were in accommodation on their first night of release from custody (excluding cases where the status was unknown). This is up from 80% in 2019-20, the year immediately before our accommodation investments began.
In July 2021, we launched our groundbreaking Community Accommodation Service Tier-3 in five probation regions, to guarantee up to 12-weeks temporary accommodation to prison leavers subject to probation supervision who are at risk of homelessness on release, including those released under the End of Custody Supervised Licence measure. From April 2023, the service was expanded across all probation regions in England and Wales and continues to bring new beds online as the service embeds. By January 2023, the proportion of offenders housed on the first night of their release from custody was 7.6 percentage points higher in CAS3 regions versus non-CAS3 regions.
Asked by: Alex Cunningham (Labour - Stockton North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether it is his policy to invest all additional revenue from court and tribunal fees into the Courts and Tribunals Service to help tackle the civil case backlog.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Additional income raised from court and tribunal fees will make a significant contribution to vital work taking place across the Department to facilitate an effective and efficient justice system. This includes our continuous efforts to improve HMCTS service performance and reduce court backlogs.
Fees generated £727 million in income for the Ministry of Justice in 2022/23 out of the total c.£2.3 billion that it cost to run HMCTS. The recent round of fee uplifts is expected to raise another £30 million – £37 million a year in additional income.
Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of people recalled to prison were recalled due to (a) new offences, (b) a lack of address and (c) non-compliance with appointments in the latest 12 months for which data is available.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Public protection is our priority. The decision to recall on offender on licensed supervision is taken on the professional advice of senior probation staff following consideration of safe alternatives to recall. Where offenders are recalled, it is because they present a risk of serious harm to the public and the controls available are no longer sufficient to keep the public safe. These individuals will remain in prison for only as long as necessary to protect the public.
Reasons for recall are recorded and published as set out in the table below. Further breakdown of recall reasons is not possible without significant manual checks.
Recall period | Oct-Dec 2022 | Jan-Mar 2023* | Apr-Jun 2023 | Jul-Sep 2023 | % Proportion |
Total Recalls | 6,092 | 6,824 | 6,814 | 7,030 |
|
Facing further charge | 1,821 | 1,977 | 1,883 | 1,815 | 28 |
Non-compliance | 4,378 | 5,047 | 5,038 | 5,376 | 74 |
Failed to keep in touch | 1,960 | 2,140 | 2,110 | 2,286 | 32 |
Failed to reside | 1,613 | 1,792 | 1,810 | 1,920 | 27 |
Drugs/alcohol | 413 | 437 | 489 | 577 | 7 |
Poor Behaviour - Relationships | 205 | 214 | 212 | 224 | 3 |
HDC - Time violation | 124 | 131 | 171 | 151 | 2 |
HDC - Inability to monitor | 65 | 75 | 71 | 81 | 1 |
Failed home visit | 89 | 78 | 73 | 86 | 1 |
HDC - Failed installation | 37 | 29 | 30 | 51 | 1 |
HDC - Equipment Tamper | 9 | 2 | 15 | 11 | 0 |
Other | 1,091 | 1,299 | 1,304 | 1,296 | 19 |
* Figures for Jan-Mar 2023 have been revised since last publication.
The table includes instances of offenders recalled multiple times.
Recall reasons do not sum to the total number of recalls published, as more than one reason can be recorded against each recall.
We routinely publish recall data at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.
Asked by: Kevin Brennan (Labour - Cardiff West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance his Department has published on when a person with an end of custody supervised licence should be recalled to prison.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Public protection is our priority. Offenders released early on ECSL are subject to a standard supervision licence which is designed to enable the Probation Service to manage the risk that offenders may pose on release from prison and to safeguard public protection. The recall process is the same for those released on ECSL and other standard releases.
The decision to recall an offender on licensed supervision is taken on the professional advice of senior probation staff following consideration of safe alternatives to recall. Where offenders are recalled, it is because they present a risk of serious harm to the public and the controls available are no longer sufficient to keep the public safe. These individuals will remain in prison for only as long as necessary to protect the public. Guidance on the recall of offenders to prison is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/recall-review-and-re-release-of-recalled-prisoners.
Asked by: Siobhain McDonagh (Labour - Mitcham and Morden)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average waiting time was for a (a) rape, (b) murder, (c) GBH and (d) robbery trial in each year since 2010.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We have interpreted waiting time to refer to the time between the date of sending a case to the Crown Court and the start of the substantive Crown Court hearing.
The average waiting times of defendants dealt with in rape, murder, GBH and robbery trial cases where a not guilty plea was entered in the Crown Court can be found in the below table based on published annual data from 2014 to 2023. Data prior to 2014 is not available.
While the Crown Court is still recovering from the impact of the pandemic and disruptive action from the Bar, which reduced our ability to hear cases swiftly, the latest published statistics show that the median age of cases that are outstanding was around 6 months.
We are committed to ensuring the delivery of swift justice for all victims and have introduced a raft of measures to achieve that aim. This includes funding around 107,000 sitting days during the most recent financial year (FY23,24), recruiting up to 1,000 judges annually across all jurisdictions and investing in the continued use of 20 Nightingale courtrooms into this financial year (FY24/25) to allow the courts to work at full capacity.
Judges do prioritise cases involving vulnerable complainants and witnesses, and seek to ensure that domestic abuse, serious sexual offences and those with vulnerable witnesses are listed at the first available opportunity. The Senior Presiding Judge has also recently announced that all rape cases outstanding for more than two years at court will be listed by the end of July 2024.
Average waiting times (weeks) of defendants dealt with in rape, murder, GBH and robbery for-trial cases where a not guilty plea was entered in the Crown Court, annually, 2014 - 2023 | ||||||||
| Rape | Murder | GBH | Robbery | ||||
Year | Median | Mean | Median | Mean | Median | Mean | Median | Mean |
2014 | 27.6 | 29.5 | 25.0 | 26.3 | 26.6 | 30.1 | 23.9 | 24.5 |
2015 | 28.9 | 31.8 | 25.7 | 28.8 | 28.0 | 33.0 | 24.4 | 28.4 |
2016 | 28.0 | 30.9 | 24.3 | 23.1 | 25.9 | 33.4 | 24.0 | 27.3 |
2017 | 28.8 | 31.5 | 24.0 | 24.6 | 24.9 | 30.5 | 22.6 | 24.6 |
2018 | 29.6 | 32.9 | 23.7 | 23.7 | 24.7 | 28.9 | 22.6 | 23.4 |
2019 | 26.7 | 30.1 | 24.6 | 24.5 | 24.1 | 26.7 | 22.9 | 23.2 |
2020 | 30.6 | 32.5 | 25.5 | 28.9 | 27.0 | 31.4 | 25.4 | 27.8 |
2021 | 41.0 | 44.8 | 32.6 | 36.9 | 36.7 | 44.0 | 33.9 | 39.4 |
2022 | 39.7 | 44.4 | 33.0 | 36.6 | 35.9 | 46.7 | 32.4 | 43.1 |
2023 | 41.7 | 48.2 | 33.6 | 38.5 | 36.9 | 50.3 | 29.7 | 47.6 |