Asked by: Max Wilkinson (Liberal Democrat - Cheltenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment has his department made of the potential benefits of introducing mandatory regular building surveys and maintenance plans in support of vulnerable adults under the court of protection.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
No such assessment has been made. The court can appoint a range of persons to fulfil the role of deputy in managing the financial affairs, and if appropriate the property affairs, of a vulnerable adult who lacks the capacity to make decisions about their assets.
Where a deputy is authorised to manage such property, they must act in accordance with the terms of the deputyship order and must act in the best interests of the vulnerable adult. The deputy must protect the property by ensuring it is secure and that appropriate insurance is in place. Keeping the property secure includes ensuring that any necessary maintenance is carried out by an appropriately qualified contractor.
Asked by: Tom Gordon (Liberal Democrat - Harrogate and Knaresborough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to respond to the letters of 7 October 2025 and 8 January 2026 from the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough with case reference TG09539.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Department apologises for the significant delay in responding. We regret that this falls short of expected standards. A response was sent on 10 February.
Asked by: Lord Hayward (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what proportion of the number of fines issued by the court system to individuals were unpaid in the last full year for which they have data, broken down by economic region if that breakdown is available.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has no ability to identify the number of fines that are unpaid in the last full year by reference to available digital system reports. Nor could any such report be created and run. Instead, it would be necessary to interrogate court records manually. Accordingly, the information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
In addition to the complexities of the way digital systems operate, assessing payment outcomes over a fixed period is complicated in and of itself. For example, complexities are introduced by later account movements, including account consolidations, Transfer of Fine Orders and write offs. These processes can remove accounts as discrete records or require them to be written off and re raised on different systems, creating a risk of misattribution and double counting. As a result, activity recorded within a given period may relate to fines imposed outside that period, meaning period-based measures of payment rates or balances are inherently unreliable without full account level review.
Asked by: Will Forster (Liberal Democrat - Woking)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to amend the Matrimonial Causes Act.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has no plans to amend the Matrimonial Causes Act at this stage.
We are in the process of exploring the issues identified by the Law Commission in its 2024 report on financial remedies, ahead of issuing a consultation by Spring this year.
Asked by: Liz Jarvis (Liberal Democrat - Eastleigh)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what her proposed timetable is for launching the consultation on the reform of weddings law in England and Wales; and what the proposed duration of that consultation will be.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We will be undertaking the consultation on the reform of weddings law in England and Wales early this year. The exact publication date and duration is yet to be confirmed.
Asked by: Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they take to ensure that child sexual abuse material is completely removed from cloud servers as well as local devices upon the conclusion of any trial concerning such material.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice does not hold operational responsibility for the removal of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) from devices or cloud servers. Where such material is obtained as part of a criminal investigation, responsibility for the retention, secure storage and destruction of such material rests with the police who act in accordance with operational, evidential and legal requirements.
Asked by: Toby Perkins (Labour - Chesterfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court days were lost in 2025 due to non-delivery of remanded prisoners to court by courier firms by a) prison held in, b) contracted courier company, c) Crown Court and d) Magistrates court.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Data on the number of trials declared ineffective due to the non-production of defendants can be found here: Trial effectiveness at the Criminal Courts tool.
In the most recent reported quarter (July to September 2025), non-production of defendants accounted for 2% of ineffective trials in the Crown Court and 4% of ineffective trials in the magistrates’ court.
Securing data on the impact that non-production of defendants has had on sitting time would come at a disproportionate cost, due to the time required to process this information.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he has taken to monitor and evaluate the adequacy of Legal Aid funding awarded under the Schedule 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Schedule 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) describes the civil services in scope of legal aid under s.9 LASPO.
In January 2023, the Ministry of Justice launched a comprehensive Review of Civil Legal Aid (RoCLA), to identify issues facing the system and improve its sustainability. The Review examined the civil legal aid system in its entirety, including how services are procured, how well the current system works for users and providers, and how civil legal aid impacts the wider justice system. The Review has now concluded, and all reports are available here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/civil-legal-aid-review.
The evidence from RoCLA indicated that the housing and immigration sectors face particularly acute challenges with service provision and high demand. In response, we are increasing fees for all housing and debt, and immigration and asylum legal aid work. This represents a significant investment – the first major increase in fees since 1996. Uplifts to fees for controlled immigration and housing work - generally early advice and some legal representation - came into effect on 22 December 2025, injecting an additional £18 million into the civil legal aid sector each year.
We will monitor and evaluate the impact of this fee increase through engagement with the sector and through provider numbers. We are in regular dialogue with representative bodies and our provider base more broadly about the health of the market, and several new research and evidence projects are underway that aim to improve our understanding about market capacity and demand.
RoCLA identified a range of issues – beyond fees – that make a difference to the profession. We are looking at other potential changes to support providers, for example contractual requirements that providers say are burdensome.
Asked by: Toby Perkins (Labour - Chesterfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court days were lost in 2025 due to the unavailability of courtrooms as a result of building failures by a) crown court, b) magistrates court and c) family court.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The number of court days lost due to building failures in the last full financial year (2024/25) is as follows:
Crown Court – 258 days
Magistrates’ Court – 36 days
Family Court – 2 days
To put this into context, over the same period we sat over 107,000 days in the Crown Court.
A lost court day is defined as a planned sitting day consisting of two sessions (one morning, one afternoon session) that is cancelled, adjourned or unable to proceed due to unforeseen circumstances, structural issues or scheduling conflicts. The figures above reflect court days lost due to building failures only. Workforce shortages are also a major cause of lost time: in 2024, over 1,000 trials were cancelled owing to a lack of counsel, which is why we are investing further in legal aid and match funding pupillages for criminal barristers.
Thanks to the efforts of court staff and the judiciary, where a building failure occurs, losing court days can often be averted through our ability to move cases to another courtroom or nearby court building, or by using remote hearing arrangements.
It is vital that court infrastructure does not prevent hearings from taking place, that is why we announced a boost in court capital maintenance and project funding from £120 million in 2024/25, to £148.5 million for 2025/26.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to prevent individuals subject to active civil court orders from receiving Legal Aid.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Anyone can receive civil legal aid, provided that their case is in scope of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) and they pass the applicable means and merits tests, along with any necessary evidence requirements.
Criminal legal aid may be granted to defendants in criminal cases if they pass the applicable means and merits (interests of justice) tests. It is an accepted principle under both domestic law and international human rights agreements, as a component of the right to a fair trial, that those charged with a criminal offence have the right to legal assistance if needed.
It is possible for individuals subject to active civil court orders to claim legal aid; the legal aid framework does not prevent this. To receive legal aid, the matter must fall within the scope of the legal aid scheme, and the applicant must pass both the means and merits tests. The tests only apply to the case for which legal aid is sought, assessing financial eligibility and merits eligibility including, in relation to domestic violence cases, prospects of success and proportionality. An individual being subject to an unrelated active civil court order would not impact that assessment.