Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what checks are undertaken to ensure Hon Members and other individuals are not sent court orders to which (a) they are not party and (b) have sensitive personal information of others.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) processed the claim accurately and in accordance with the information provided by the claimant.
HMCTS has advised that the hon. Member for Slough’s parliamentary email address was included on the claim form by the claimant to the proceedings as the contact address for the Second Defendant. As a result, this was added to the court database and would generate court correspondence including court orders to the hon. Member’s parliamentary email address.
HMCTS received an email from the MP’s office on 29 December 2025 and the court issued a response to him on the same day. The MP continued to receive correspondence because his office did not specify that the email address should be removed. The court would usually require notification and evidence that an administrative error has been made so the individual's details can be removed from the court record.
Documents were sent to the hon. Member for Slough who is not a party to this case rather than to the second defendant. HMCTS has corrected this and is ensuring service on the second defendant and will notify all parties.
This is not a matter for the Information Commissioners Office as HMCTS has followed the process and accurately recorded the claim details from the claimant’s form.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 23 December 2025 to Question 100768, whether AI-generated transcripts will have the same evidential status as human-produced transcripts for the purposes of a) appeals and b) judicial review.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HMCTS recognises the significant potential for AI transcription to drive greater efficiency and opportunities for expanding open justice across the courts and tribunals. As such, HMCTS is piloting how automated transcription (using AI) could assist judges in preparing and writing decisions in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. This work is one of 15 AI Exemplar projects across government.
In line with HMCTS Responsible AI principles, any work to scale the provision of AI-generated transcripts across the courts and tribunals would need to ensure appropriate human manual review processes and define the evidential status of AI-generated transcripts. In other words, AI transcripts are reviewed by humans to ensure fairness and accuracy.
Asked by: Lee Anderson (Reform UK - Ashfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make it his policy to reopen local magistrate courts that have been closed to help clear the court case backlog.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
50% of magistrates’ courts were closed under previous Governments between 2010 and 2020.
Estate capacity is not a limiting factor to sitting the funded days in the magistrates courts. In other words, we are investing in more court staff, legal aid and judge time so that magistrates can hear more cases - up to £450 million in additional courts funding per year. There is therefore a difference between system capacity and physical capacity of courtrooms. Running courtrooms requires not just available courtrooms, but judicial time, and sufficient numbers of legal professionals.
We continue to keep the court estate under review to ensure it meets operational priorities. Projects to boost court capacity across the country include a new Magistrate’s Court in Blackpool and an additional 18 court rooms in the City of London.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment has been made of the adequacy of support available to parents applying to the Court of Protection for an order authorising access to their child's (a) Child Trust Fund and (b) Junior ISA when their child lacks capacity to manage their financial assets.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Where a young adult lacks mental capacity, the law requires parents or a guardian to have legal authority to make decisions on their behalf about financial assets or property. This longstanding requirement is vital in ensuring that vulnerable people are safeguarded and protected from potential financial abuse. The requirement for legal authority extends to accessing funds held in a Child Trust Fund or a Junior ISA.
On 9 June 2023, the Ministry of Justice published the ‘Making Financial Decisions for young people: parent and carer toolkit’ explaining the process by which parents and guardians of disabled children who lack capacity can obtain legal authority if no other arrangements are in place to provide such authority. This can be done by making an application to the Court of Protection for an order authorising access to monies held in a Child Trust Fund or Junior ISA. The toolkit is available on Gov.UK. Information to assist parents or carers in the completion of one of the required court forms can be found here: How to apply to make property and finance decisions on someone’s behalf (including Child Trust Funds) - GOV.UK
Ministers are working closely to consider what further steps could be taken to ameliorate the process for supporting young people without capacity to access small value capital assets. The Ministry of Justice will continue to engage with key stakeholders to understand more about the difficulties and potential changes to address these while maintaining necessary safeguards.
Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, a) what steps the Government is taking to reduce delays within the civil justice system, and b) whether he has considered the use of mediation as a potential solution.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to improving performance of, and to reducing demands on, the civil courts. We have put in place measures such as the introduction of digital systems through the HMCTS Reform Programme to drive performance improvements and are focused on increasing capacity through more judicial recruitment.
The quarterly period covering July to September 2025, showed that the median time taken for small claims to go from issue to trial was 39 weeks, 5.9 weeks faster than the same period in 2024. For fast, intermediate and multi-track claims, it was 60 weeks, 5.1 weeks faster than a year earlier. This shows a positive trend regarding timeliness. Published statistics can be found in table 1_5 of the main tables here: Civil justice statistics quarterly: July to September 2025 - GOV.UK.
We recognise the benefits of mediation in resolving disputes swiftly. Mandatory mediation for small money claims below £10,000 is now integrated into the county court process, saving time and costs. A formal evaluation will be published in the summer of this year, and findings will inform decisions on further expansions of mandatory mediation.
Jan. 22 2026
Source Page: Sentencing Act ensuring punishment cuts crime gets Royal AssentJan. 22 2026
Source Page: FOI releases for June 2025Jan. 22 2026
Source Page: FOI releases for June 2025Jan. 22 2026
Source Page: FOI releases for June 2025Jan. 22 2026
Source Page: Civil court users survey: feasibility study report