Ministry of Justice

Private prosecutions are brought before the same courts in England and Wales as prosecutions commenced by criminal justice agencies. The prioritisation of cases in the criminal court caseload is a matter for the independent judiciary. The Ministry of Justice published a consultation “on the oversight and regulation of private prosecutors in the criminal justice system”, between 6 March and 8 May 2025 and will set out next steps shortly.

The Ministry of Justice holds management information on private prosecutions brought before the magistrates’ courts and this is shown in the table below. The definition of private prosecutions is detailed in the Department’s consultation referenced above.

Table One: Defendants dealt with in private prosecutions at the magistrates’ courts in England and Wales, annually 2014 – 2024

Information on private prosecutions at the Crown Court cannot be produced robustly within costs.

Private prosecutions are brought before the same courts in England and Wales as prosecutions commenced by criminal justice agencies. The prioritisation of cases in the criminal court caseload is a matter for the independent judiciary. The Ministry of Justice published a consultation “on the oversight and regulation of private prosecutors in the criminal justice system”, between 6 March and 8 May 2025 and will set out next steps shortly.

The Ministry of Justice holds management information on private prosecutions brought before the magistrates’ courts and this is shown in the table below. The definition of private prosecutions is detailed in the Department’s consultation referenced above.

Table One: Defendants dealt with in private prosecutions at the magistrates’ courts in England and Wales, annually 2014 – 2024

Information on private prosecutions at the Crown Court cannot be produced robustly within costs.

Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government.

While the overwhelming majority of offenders are released correctly, we are clamping down on those releases in error that do occur – including through improved staff training and establishing a new specialist unit. A joint protocol between HMPPS and NPCC is in place, to ensure effective and timely communication between partner agencies when an individual is released in error to rearrest them as quickly as possible.

We have gripped this chaos – by building more prison places, ending the last Government’s early release scheme, being transparent with the public, immediately making changes to sentences to ease pressure on the system and now, taking landmark reforms through our Sentencing Bill to make sure that prisons never run out of places again

Annual totals for releases in error are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK(opens in a new tab), and provide data up to March 2025.

The number of people who have been released in error since April 2025 cannot be provided because it would form a subset of releases in error data which underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government.

While the overwhelming majority of offenders are released correctly, we are clamping down on those releases in error that do occur – including through improved staff training and establishing a new specialist unit. A joint protocol between HMPPS and NPCC is in place, to ensure effective and timely communication between partner agencies when an individual is released in error to rearrest them as quickly as possible.

We have gripped this chaos – by building more prison places, ending the last Government’s early release scheme, being transparent with the public, immediately making changes to sentences to ease pressure on the system and now, taking landmark reforms through our Sentencing Bill to make sure that prisons never run out of places again

Annual totals for releases in error are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK(opens in a new tab), and provide data up to March 2025.

The number of people who have been released in error since April 2025 cannot be provided because it would form a subset of releases in error data which underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government.

While the overwhelming majority of offenders are released correctly, we are clamping down on those releases in error that do occur – including through improved staff training and establishing a new specialist unit. A joint protocol between HMPPS and NPCC is in place, to ensure effective and timely communication between partner agencies when an individual is released in error to rearrest them as quickly as possible.

We have gripped this chaos – by building more prison places, ending the last Government’s early release scheme, being transparent with the public, immediately making changes to sentences to ease pressure on the system and now, taking landmark reforms through our Sentencing Bill to make sure that prisons never run out of places again

Annual totals for releases in error are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK(opens in a new tab), and provide data up to March 2025.

The number of people who have been released in error since April 2025 cannot be provided because it would form a subset of releases in error data which underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government.

While the overwhelming majority of offenders are released correctly, we are clamping down on those releases in error that do occur – including through improved staff training and establishing a new specialist unit. A joint protocol between HMPPS and NPCC is in place, to ensure effective and timely communication between partner agencies when an individual is released in error to rearrest them as quickly as possible.

We have gripped this chaos – by building more prison places, ending the last Government’s early release scheme, being transparent with the public, immediately making changes to sentences to ease pressure on the system and now, taking landmark reforms through our Sentencing Bill to make sure that prisons never run out of places again

Annual totals for releases in error are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK(opens in a new tab), and provide data up to March 2025.

The number of people who have been released in error since April 2025 cannot be provided because it would form a subset of releases in error data which underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

The Ministry of Justice cannot provide the information requested. The internal HR system records details of staff suspensions but does not include the reasons for those suspensions. It is therefore not possible to identify, from centrally held data, which suspensions may relate specifically to the mistaken early release of prisoners.

Releases in error have been increasing for several years and are another symptom of the prison system crisis inherited by this Government.

While the overwhelming majority of offenders are released correctly, we are clamping down on those releases in error that do occur. As the Deputy Prime Minister set out to the House, immediate measures have been introduced to strengthen release checks across prisons – making them the strongest release checks to ever be in place.

We have gripped this chaos – by building more prison places, ending the last Government’s early release scheme, being transparent with the public, immediately making changes to sentences to ease pressure on the system and, now, taking landmark reforms through our Sentencing Bill to make sure that prisons never run out of places again.

Annual totals for releases in error are published each July in the HMPPS Annual Digest, available via Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK, and provide data up to March 2025.

The total number of releases in error from 5 July 2024 to 31 March 2025 is 193.

The number of people who have been released in error since April 2025 cannot be provided because it would form a subset of releases in error data which underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

Justice Transcribe is an AI-powered note-taking tool that records and transcribes conversations between probation officers and people on probation. It was developed in-house.

The new HMPPS Welsh Language Scheme (24-27), published this month, sets out how the English and Welsh languages will be treated equally when delivering services to the public. This includes upholding and reinforcing the rights of prisoners to use Welsh, for example, through recording of language preference on arrival, provision of relevant information in Welsh, and offering opportunities for prisoners to use Welsh socially.

It is vital that information about an offender’s release is available to victims who need it most. Victims who are eligible for, and who have opted into, the Probation Service Victim Contact Scheme or Victim Notification Scheme will be informed about any changes to an offender’s release date where it is appropriate to do so. Responsibility for informing victims about release through each of these schemes sits with HMPPS Victim Liaison Officers.

We have committed to improve the support and information for victims, which is why, through the Victim and Courts Bill, we are establishing a new route for all other victims to request information about an offender’s release, which will be delivered through a new, dedicated Helpline. This will give victims confidence about the routes available to receive information about their offender’s release.

With regards to how many victims have been notified of the early release of their offender in each of the last five years, the information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

It is vital that information about an offender’s release is available to victims who need it most. Victims who are eligible for, and who have opted into, the Probation Service Victim Contact Scheme or Victim Notification Scheme will be informed about any changes to an offender’s release date where it is appropriate to do so. Responsibility for informing victims about release through each of these schemes sits with HMPPS Victim Liaison Officers.

We have committed to improve the support and information for victims, which is why, through the Victim and Courts Bill, we are establishing a new route for all other victims to request information about an offender’s release, which will be delivered through a new, dedicated Helpline. This will give victims confidence about the routes available to receive information about their offender’s release.

With regards to how many victims have been notified of the early release of their offender in each of the last five years, the information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

It is vital that information about an offender’s release is available to victims who need it most. Victims who are eligible for, and who have opted into, the Probation Service Victim Contact Scheme or Victim Notification Scheme will be informed about any changes to an offender’s release date where it is appropriate to do so. Responsibility for informing victims about release through each of these schemes sits with HMPPS Victim Liaison Officers.

We have committed to improve the support and information for victims, which is why, through the Victim and Courts Bill, we are establishing a new route for all other victims to request information about an offender’s release, which will be delivered through a new, dedicated Helpline. This will give victims confidence about the routes available to receive information about their offender’s release.

With regards to how many victims have been notified of the early release of their offender in each of the last five years, the information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Government is committed to strengthening the regulation of enforcement firms and agents who use the Taking Control of Goods procedure in England and Wales. On 9 June 2025, we launched a consultation on proposals to introduce an independent statutory regulator for enforcement firms, when parliamentary time allows. The consultation also asked whether a regulator should have a role in certificating enforcement agents.

The consultation closed on 21 July 2025. We will publish the Government’s response in due course.

The Government is committed to strengthening the regulation of enforcement firms and agents who use the Taking Control of Goods procedure in England and Wales. On 9 June 2025, we launched a consultation on proposals to introduce an independent statutory regulator for enforcement firms, when parliamentary time allows. The consultation also asked whether a regulator should have a role in certificating enforcement agents.

The consultation closed on 21 July 2025. We will publish the Government’s response in due course.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Government recognises the vital role that solicitors’ practices play in supporting access to justice and sustaining local economies, including in rural communities. However, solicitors’ firms operate as independent businesses, and decisions about where they open, or close are commercial matters for those firms.

The Ministry of Justice works closely with representative and regulatory bodies, including the Law Society, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), and the Legal Services Board (LSB), to help ensure that the wider legal services market remains effective, competitive, and accessible to people across England and Wales.

The Government is also taking wider steps to support the sustainability of the legal aid and legal services sectors. Ensuring that solicitors and firms remain able to operate effectively across England and Wales underpins the justice system as a whole.

We have no central record of any financial penalties against any supplier/delivery partner in relation to this issue.

Contract management actions are undertaken as standard; HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice engage suppliers via frameworks managed by the Crown Commercial Service and did so over the course of the HMCTS Reform Programme (for example on the Digital Outcome and Specialists and G Cloud frameworks). These frameworks are designed to enable Government Departments to procure digital and technology services in a compliant, flexible, and value-for-money manner. Both frameworks operate under pre-approved terms and conditions that set clear expectations for supplier performance, financial management, and contract governance, providing Departments with consistent mechanisms to manage delivery risk and ensure accountability across multiple suppliers.

This Government recognises the important role that legal aid plays in helping some of the most vulnerable in society access legal advice.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) monitors the numbers of providers in each procurement area and across all categories of law. It takes operational action where it can, to respond to market pressures that may arise and works closely with the Ministry of Justice on policy solutions concerning the supply of legal aid.

The LAA is satisfied that there is adequate access to legal aid services in Ely and East Cambridgeshire across all categories of legal aid.

We have confirmed that we are increasing fees for all housing & debt, and immigration & asylum legal aid work. This is a significant investment of £20 million a year – the first increase since 1996. In addition, we are looking at other potential changes that could support providers, for example, (civil) contractual requirements regarding provider offices and limits to the provision of remote legal aid that providers say are burdensome. Any changes would aim to give providers more autonomy in meeting client need, while maintaining effective in-person provision for clients who need this.

Further, in December 2024, we announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92 million more a year, subject to consultation, to help support the sustainability of the criminal legal aid sector. The consultation launched in May 2025, and we will publish the response later this year.

This is in addition to our response to the Crime Lower consultation, confirming an uplift to the lowest police station fees, introducing a new Youth Court fee scheme, and paying for travel in certain circumstances. Together, these changes provided a £24 million investment for criminal legal aid providers.

No personal or sensitive information was exposed as a result of the IT system bug referenced.

Anyone who wishes to make decisions for a person who lacks the mental capacity to do so for themselves must have the legal authority to act. The provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 reflect that principle and provide safeguards to protect the interests of persons who lack mental capacity.

Parents are often unaware they need legal authority to make decisions once their child reaches 18, when legal parental responsibility ends. The Government acknowledges this lack of awareness and in relation to property and finance has produced a toolkit ‘Making Financial decisions for young people who lack capacity’ to raise awareness: Making financial decisions for young people who lack capacity: A toolkit for parents and carers - GOV.UK.

Parents and carers can still be involved in decisions regarding the young person. Section 4 of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005, outlines the principles for making decisions in a person’s best interests for whom they care and confirms that the decision maker should consult with anyone engaged in caring for the person as well as close family and friends.

I acknowledge and respect that grandparents and other extended family members often play an important role in children’s lives and can provide stability in families, particularly where parents are separating.

Any contact with the child should always be in their child's best interests. This is why there is no statutory right for any adult to have contact with a child. It is already possible for extended family members to seek leave of the court to apply for ‘spending time with’ or ‘living with’ arrangements through a Child Arrangements Order under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (‘the Act’). The requirement for grandparents or others to seek the leave of the court first is to ensure that their application is in the child's best interests; but in certain circumstances, applicants may be entitled to apply without the leave of the court under section 10 (5) of the Act. These circumstances include where the child has lived with them for a period of at least three years. Therefore, the Government has no current plans to legislate further on this issue.

The core education offer in all prisons includes reading skills and their practical application. These are an integral part of literacy provision. In addition to this, prisons benefit from locally commissioned support delivered by voluntary and community sector organisations. These partners play a vital role in engaging individuals who may lack the confidence to participate in classroom-based learning, offering tailored and accessible routes into reading. Every prison now has a dedicated reading strategy, underpinned by HMPPS’s National Prison Reading Framework which supports the development and evaluation of effective reading provision.

The Government has a robust set of policies in place to ensure there are well-defined and tested incident management processes, and to ensure continuity of essential functions in the event of system or service failure. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology will publish the Government Cyber Action Plan this Winter, which will set out a clear approach for the Government and the Wider Public Sector to manage cyber security and resilience incidents.

All tableware (including plates, bowls, cups and cutlery) used in HM Prisons are made from polypropylene and polycarbonate plastics for safety reasons. They are manufactured in house in our plastics injection moulding workshops. The items form part of the equipment issued to prisoners for their personal use and are washed and reused by the individual after each meal.

It is important to note that despite being made of plastic they are multi-use and are washed and reused time and time again. Each of the items are 100% recyclable.

The Government is committed to supporting British businesses and ensuring they have the best chance to win public contracts.

The new Procurement Act creates a simpler and more transparent system that will support British businesses bidding for work. The Act also allows contracting authorities to set standards that recognise the quality and standard of UK businesses and products.

Alongside this, the National Procurement Policy Statement encourages contracting authorities to consider this Government’s Industrial strategy and the sectors vital to our economic growth.

It is crucial that we have a justice system that punishes offenders and supports victims. That is why increasing restriction on serious sexual and violent offenders is part of our Plan for Change to cut crime and make streets safer.

Through the Sentencing Bill, we are introducing a new power which will allow restriction zones to be imposed on offenders on licence, where appropriate. These will restrict certain offenders to specific areas – so their victims know they are safe wherever else they want to go. We are working to finalise the operation of, and eligibility for, the new restriction zones, subject to the passage of the Sentencing Bill

Where an offender is serving a life sentence, they may only be released once they have completed their minimum term (or tariff) set by the court and where the independent Parole Board is satisfied that they no longer need to be detained for the protection of the public. If the Board directs the release of a life-sentence prisoner, it will also decide what licence conditions will apply to safely manage the offender in the community. Any subsequent variation of the conditions on a life licence will also be a matter for the Parole Board to decide.

HM Prison and Probation Service responded to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Death Report following the inquest into the death of Stephen Sleaford on 9 December 2024, which was within the statutory deadline of 56 days from the date of the report. The response is now available on the Chief Coroner’s website.

The following table contains the number of Ministry of Justice (inc. HMPPS) employees who had a disciplinary investigation case opened against them between 1 April 2020 and 31 March 2025, by financial year:

Caveats

1. This is based on the latest available investigations data as at 30 September 2025 and includes all cases where the investigation was commissioned or opened between 1 April 2020 and 31 March 2025 by financial year.

2. A small proportion of individuals will have been subject to multiple investigation cases. Within each financial year, individuals are only counted once in this table, regardless of how many investigations are opened against. However, where an individual has an investigation opened in more than one year, they will be counted once in each of those years.

3. This only includes cases where the individual that the case was opened was employed by MoJ HQ, HMPPS, HMCTS, OPG, LAA, and CICA, and will include all cases regardless of outcome. This excludes non-payroll employees such as agency staff and contractors.

4. Within HMPPS, all investigation cases related to disciplinary processes and so all investigation cases have been included here. Within MoJ, investigations can relate to either disciplinary processes or grievances processes. Therefore, only investigations relating to disciplinary processes have been included.

The Government has noted the findings of the High Court Enforcement Officer Association’s recent report about the process for transferring possession cases to the High Court for enforcement by High Court Enforcement Officers and is considering its recommendations.

The Government has noted the findings of the High Court Enforcement Officer Association’s recent report about the process for transferring possession cases to the High Court for enforcement by High Court Enforcement Officers and is considering its recommendations.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.

The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.

The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.

Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.

The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.

While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.

The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.

The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.

Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.

The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.

While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.

The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.

The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.

Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.

The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.

While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.

The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.

The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.

Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.

The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.

While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Applications for probate for the estate of an individual who died domiciled in England and Wales will normally be dealt with by reference to domestic laws.

Where an estate involves foreign assets, the onus is on personal representatives to assess which laws would apply in an individual case, and whether probate would be required in other jurisdictions to administer a cross-border estate.

Where it is necessary, private international law rules may need to be exercised to determine which law of succession should apply to the assets applies. These rules are well established and there are no plans to seek an international agreement with individual states.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Crown Court operates from 84 buildings across England and Wales, with a core estate of over 500 courtrooms. Most are jury-enabled and suitable for trials, with the remainder supporting other judicial work, such as interlocutory hearings. The wider HMCTS estate—including magistrates’, civil, family, and tribunal rooms —can also be used for Crown Court business when required. As a result, the precise number of rooms available for Crown Court use at any given time is variable.

HMCTS’s priority is to ensure all funded sitting days are fully utilised each financial year through active courtroom management. Estate capacity is not a limiting factor: last year, we sat 107,771, representing over 99% of our allocation, and we remain on track to deliver all allocated days this year.

Temporary unavailability may arise due to maintenance, but also due to overspill from other trials, alternative judicial activities (such as, box work, civil, family and tribunals hearings, or coroner’s court work), or other legitimate uses (including meetings and video-link sessions). However, these factors do not prevent the Crown Courts from sitting at their funded allocation.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Crown Court operates from 84 buildings across England and Wales, with a core estate of over 500 courtrooms. Most are jury-enabled and suitable for trials, with the remainder supporting other judicial work, such as interlocutory hearings. The wider HMCTS estate—including magistrates’, civil, family, and tribunal rooms —can also be used for Crown Court business when required. As a result, the precise number of rooms available for Crown Court use at any given time is variable.

HMCTS’s priority is to ensure all funded sitting days are fully utilised each financial year through active courtroom management. Estate capacity is not a limiting factor: last year, we sat 107,771, representing over 99% of our allocation, and we remain on track to deliver all allocated days this year.

Temporary unavailability may arise due to maintenance, but also due to overspill from other trials, alternative judicial activities (such as, box work, civil, family and tribunals hearings, or coroner’s court work), or other legitimate uses (including meetings and video-link sessions). However, these factors do not prevent the Crown Courts from sitting at their funded allocation.

The number of human rights appeals (those lodged on human rights grounds) determined by the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal and the number of those that were successful and allowed by the Tribunal can be found in the following table:

Table 1. First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) - Number of appeals determined at hearing or on paper for Human Rights Appeals, April 2024 to March 2025(1)

The table shows the latest 12 months of available data. Published statistics can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunals-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2025.

The number of asylum, protection and revocation of protection appeals (those lodged on grounds relating to breach of the UK’s Refugee Convention obligations) determined by the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal and the number of those that were successful and allowed by the Tribunal can be found in the following table:

Table 1. First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) - Number of appeals determined at hearing or on paper for Asylum/Protection/Revocation of Protection(1), April 2024 to March 2025(2)

The table shows the latest 12 months of available data. Published statistics can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunals-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2025.

The provisions in the Public Office (Accountability) Bill are not intended to have any impact on the processing or public interest considerations of Freedom of Information Act requests. The Bill does not alter the existing law or guidance about how public authorities are required to respond to freedom of information requests or the expectations on ministers in replying to written Parliamentary Questions.

The table below sets out the data held per month for the number of Recorders who hold a live Crime ticket (weekly data is not available) over the 12 months to June 2025, which is the latest month for which the data is available. It also sets out the number of Recorders who sat for at least 1 day in the Crown Court during that same month.

It should be noted that many Recorders will hold multiple tickets, so the Recorders listed here who have not sat in the Crown Court may have been sitting in Family or Civil instead. In addition, Recorders may have other professional obligations which mean that they are not available to sit in a particular month.

The Deputy Prime Minister recently announced an additional 1,250 sitting days in the Crown Court this year, which means the Crown Court will be able to sit for 111,250 days this year, 5,000 more than the days initially allocated last year. This enables the Crown Court to sit more days this year than ever before.

To preserve judicial independence, statutory responsibility for judicial training is held by the Lady Chief Justice, Senior President of Tribunals and Chief Coroner. These responsibilities are fulfilled by the Judicial College. Whilst the content of judicial training is for the judiciary to decide, Ministers have relayed the Government’s view of the importance of domestic abuse training for judges and magistrates.

All judges and magistrates complete induction and regular continuation training. Training is designed to equip the judiciary with the essential knowledge and skills they need to discharge their duties effectively.

Family judges completed specialist mandatory training on domestic abuse between 2022 and 2024, which was also made available to civil judges. Training for judges who hear criminal cases includes judgecraft, effective decision-making and sentencing, and advancing procedural fairness. Dealing with the vulnerable in court and issues relating to domestic abuse are interwoven into much of the training. Magistrates sitting in the family and criminal jurisdictions receive mandatory domestic abuse training. The training is trauma-informed and reflects the wide nature of domestic abuse including coercive and controlling behaviour. Training seminars are complemented by a range of other resources, including the Equal Treatment Bench Book which includes specific guidance in relation to domestic abuse.

The College regularly reviews its training to ensure it remains high quality and up to date, and reflects contemporary law, practice and procedure.

This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We have had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe.

Whilst this change provided the intended medium-term relief, it was only ever a temporary change to bridge to a more sustainable solution. The Sentencing Bill has now been introduced to ensure we never run out of prison space again.

Our initial operational insights suggested there was not a significant change to the use and application of recall since the implementation of SDS40. We will, however, continue to monitor this.

The requested information cannot be provided because it would form a subset of the data that underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.

Proven reoffending rates are published regularly on an annual and quarterly basis. The most recent rates are available at the following link: www.gov.uk/government/collections/proven-reoffending-statistics.

The Ministry of Justice adheres to the principles of the Armed Forces Covenant Duty. The principles inform a range of work across the Department. For example, in 2021, the Ministry of Justice was one of the first Departments to participate in the now civil service-wide initiative Great Place to Work for Veterans. Additionally, we introduced Advance into Justice in March 2022 as a fast-track scheme for service personnel leaving the Armed Forces to become prison officers. The scheme has since been expanded to include a wider range of roles across His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) and for all those who have served in the Armed Forces, as well including spouses and legal partners of service personnel.

Across the prison estate, almost all prisons have a Veterans in Custody Support Officer to provide tailored support to veterans who find themselves in prison. HMPPS also delivers services via many third sector organisations (including military charities such as SSAFA) who provide a prison in-reach service offering resettlement advice to veterans whilst in custody and guidance in preparation for release. We also have 2 Veterans Activity Hubs at HMP/YOI Holme House and HMP Risley which provide safe and supportive spaces for former service personnel in custody.

The Department will continue to work with the Ministry of Defence on the Covenant’s Statutory Guidance and implementation.