Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the average cost of determining a market rent application; and what the projected annual cost is following implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
It is not currently possible to identify the cost of determining a market rent application. This is one of several types of case heard by the Residential Property Tribunal and currently costs are not apportioned to individual case types.
We are working closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to ensure the Property Tribunal is able to accommodate the impact of the Renters’ Reform Act.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on the withdrawal of legal aid certificates in litigation cases relating to harm caused by sodium valproate; and whether people involved in such cases were aware of the availability of Exceptional Case Funding.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of making Exceptional Case Funding available to women and families on their legal cases relating to harm caused by sodium valproate.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the withdrawal of legal aid in cases involving sodium valproate on the long-term care needs on people who have brought such cases forward.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average time taken to determine a market rent application from receipt to decision is in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts & Tribunals Service does not hold specific information for applications for market rent determination. Published data is available on receipts, disposals and open caseload for residential property within Tribunals Statistics Quarterly, which will include applications for market rent determination. This information in available in column AS in tables S_2, S_3 and S_4:
Main_Tables_Q2_2025_26.ods.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many applications for market rent determination were received by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) in each of the last 12 months.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts & Tribunals Service does not hold specific information for applications for market rent determination. Published data is available on receipts, disposals and open caseload for residential property within Tribunals Statistics Quarterly, which will include applications for market rent determination. This information in available in column AS in tables S_2, S_3 and S_4:
Main_Tables_Q2_2025_26.ods.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether the Government will publish data on market rent determinations, tribunal volumes, decision times and outcomes following implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Currently HM Courts and Tribunals Services (HMCTS) publish quarterly data on the Residential Property Chamber.
HMCTS is reviewing the data captured, drawn and published from the supporting systems for the Tribunal as part of preparations for the Renters’ Rights Act.
Asked by: Andrew Griffith (Conservative - Arundel and South Downs)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to respond to the correspondence of (a) 21 November 2025, (b) 15 December 2025 and (c) 20 January 2026 from the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
A response to the correspondence was sent on 27 January 2026.
The Department apologises for the delay in responding on this occasion and we regret that this fell short of expected standards.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made an estimate of the number of (a) judges and (b) valuers required to determine market rent determination applications within reasonable timeframes following implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Judges, salaried regional surveyors (valuers), and fee paid valuers assigned to the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) Property Chamber can hear any case type in the Chamber, including rent determinations.
The number of judges in post as of 1 April 2025 assigned to the Property Chamber is published in the 2025 Judicial Diversity Statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/diversity-of-the-judiciary-2025-statistics.
2 regional surveyors and 77 valuers in post as of 1 April 2025 are assigned to the Property Chamber as their primary appointment.
We continue to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to assess the impact of the Renters’ Rights Act on the Chamber, including on judicial capacity. Recruitment was completed in 2025 for salaried and fee-paid judges of the FTT, including for the Property Chamber, and further recruitment in 2026 is planned. The independent Judicial Appointments Commission publishes data on the outcomes of these exercises once recruitment is completed: https://judicialappointments.gov.uk/completed-exercises/.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many additional (a) judges and (b) valuers have been recruited in advance of the implementation of the rent review provisions in the Renters’ Rights Act 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Judges, salaried regional surveyors (valuers), and fee paid valuers assigned to the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) Property Chamber can hear any case type in the Chamber, including rent determinations.
The number of judges in post as of 1 April 2025 assigned to the Property Chamber is published in the 2025 Judicial Diversity Statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/diversity-of-the-judiciary-2025-statistics.
2 regional surveyors and 77 valuers in post as of 1 April 2025 are assigned to the Property Chamber as their primary appointment.
We continue to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to assess the impact of the Renters’ Rights Act on the Chamber, including on judicial capacity. Recruitment was completed in 2025 for salaried and fee-paid judges of the FTT, including for the Property Chamber, and further recruitment in 2026 is planned. The independent Judicial Appointments Commission publishes data on the outcomes of these exercises once recruitment is completed: https://judicialappointments.gov.uk/completed-exercises/.