Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with the Solicitors Regulation Authority on the operation of it complaints procedure for matters involving alleged Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has not held any discussions with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regarding its handling of complaints relating to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The SRA operates independently of Government, and it would therefore not be appropriate for the Government to comment on its decisions.
The SRA has taken a series of regulatory, guidance-based, and enforcement-related actions to address SLAPPs to tackle reports of related misconduct within the legal profession. This includes issuing a warning notice in 2022 setting out expectations on solicitors’ conduct in SLAPP-type cases, which was updated in 2024, and publishing accompanying guidance reminding solicitors and law firms of their wider professional obligations not to bring unmeritorious or abusive claims. However, I will raise this with the SRA to determine what additional action they might be able to take in this area.
The Government implemented the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in June 2025, which provides protection against SLAPPs relating to economic crime. While this represents a positive first step, we are considering all options for reform to ensure that all types of SLAPPs are addressed comprehensively.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress his Department has made on ensuring the adequacy of legal protections for journalists, academics, campaigners and other public-interest actors facing Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation that fall outside the scope of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has not held any discussions with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regarding its handling of complaints relating to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The SRA operates independently of Government, and it would therefore not be appropriate for the Government to comment on its decisions.
The SRA has taken a series of regulatory, guidance-based, and enforcement-related actions to address SLAPPs to tackle reports of related misconduct within the legal profession. This includes issuing a warning notice in 2022 setting out expectations on solicitors’ conduct in SLAPP-type cases, which was updated in 2024, and publishing accompanying guidance reminding solicitors and law firms of their wider professional obligations not to bring unmeritorious or abusive claims. However, I will raise this with the SRA to determine what additional action they might be able to take in this area.
The Government implemented the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in June 2025, which provides protection against SLAPPs relating to economic crime. While this represents a positive first step, we are considering all options for reform to ensure that all types of SLAPPs are addressed comprehensively.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with the Solicitors Regulation Authority on their approach to complaints involving alleged Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation activity, including concerns that such complaints are being closed without substantive investigation.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has not held any discussions with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regarding its handling of complaints relating to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The SRA operates independently of Government, and it would therefore not be appropriate for the Government to comment on its decisions.
The SRA has taken a series of regulatory, guidance-based, and enforcement-related actions to address SLAPPs to tackle reports of related misconduct within the legal profession. This includes issuing a warning notice in 2022 setting out expectations on solicitors’ conduct in SLAPP-type cases, which was updated in 2024, and publishing accompanying guidance reminding solicitors and law firms of their wider professional obligations not to bring unmeritorious or abusive claims. However, I will raise this with the SRA to determine what additional action they might be able to take in this area.
The Government implemented the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in June 2025, which provides protection against SLAPPs relating to economic crime. While this represents a positive first step, we are considering all options for reform to ensure that all types of SLAPPs are addressed comprehensively.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to strengthen protections against non-economic crime Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has not held any discussions with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regarding its handling of complaints relating to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The SRA operates independently of Government, and it would therefore not be appropriate for the Government to comment on its decisions.
The SRA has taken a series of regulatory, guidance-based, and enforcement-related actions to address SLAPPs to tackle reports of related misconduct within the legal profession. This includes issuing a warning notice in 2022 setting out expectations on solicitors’ conduct in SLAPP-type cases, which was updated in 2024, and publishing accompanying guidance reminding solicitors and law firms of their wider professional obligations not to bring unmeritorious or abusive claims. However, I will raise this with the SRA to determine what additional action they might be able to take in this area.
The Government implemented the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in June 2025, which provides protection against SLAPPs relating to economic crime. While this represents a positive first step, we are considering all options for reform to ensure that all types of SLAPPs are addressed comprehensively.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
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 ability of the Solicitors Regulation Authority to access material over which privilege is claimed on the effectiveness of that organisation.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is the frontline regulator responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the performance of all frontline regulators, including the SRA, to ensure they operate effectively and in the public interest, including through annual performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing engagement with regulators on their statutory duties.
Section 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974 provides the SRA with the power to require solicitors and law firms to produce information and documents where the SRA is satisfied that it is necessary to do so (amongst other grounds) for the purpose of investigating whether there has been professional misconduct by a solicitor or a breach of its rules by a recognised body. It has a similar power under section 93 of the Legal Services Act 2007 in relation to licensed bodies. The SRA has published guidance on its approach to evidence gathering, which states that the SRA may request material where privilege is asserted, subject to safeguards and use for regulatory purposes only. This guidance is available at: SRA | How we gather evidence in our regulatory and disciplinary investigations | Solicitors Regulation Authority.
I met recently with the new Chair of the SRA to raise a series of performance issues with her. Whilst this Government has not undertaken its own specific assessment of the impact of the SRA’s ability to seek material over which privilege is claimed on its effectiveness as a regulator, I will discuss this with the SRA. I am aware of the ongoing proceedings concerning the scope of its statutory powers in relation to legally privileged material, and officials have discussed the matter with the SRA as part of their routine regulatory engagement.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with the Solicitors Regulation Authority's on that organisation's ability to regulate solicitors where it is unable to access material over which privilege is claimed during investigations.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is the frontline regulator responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the performance of all frontline regulators, including the SRA, to ensure they operate effectively and in the public interest, including through annual performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing engagement with regulators on their statutory duties.
Section 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974 provides the SRA with the power to require solicitors and law firms to produce information and documents where the SRA is satisfied that it is necessary to do so (amongst other grounds) for the purpose of investigating whether there has been professional misconduct by a solicitor or a breach of its rules by a recognised body. It has a similar power under section 93 of the Legal Services Act 2007 in relation to licensed bodies. The SRA has published guidance on its approach to evidence gathering, which states that the SRA may request material where privilege is asserted, subject to safeguards and use for regulatory purposes only. This guidance is available at: SRA | How we gather evidence in our regulatory and disciplinary investigations | Solicitors Regulation Authority.
I met recently with the new Chair of the SRA to raise a series of performance issues with her. Whilst this Government has not undertaken its own specific assessment of the impact of the SRA’s ability to seek material over which privilege is claimed on its effectiveness as a regulator, I will discuss this with the SRA. I am aware of the ongoing proceedings concerning the scope of its statutory powers in relation to legally privileged material, and officials have discussed the matter with the SRA as part of their routine regulatory engagement.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, by how much they plan to reduce their Department's budget to help fund the digital ID scheme.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Digital Identity policy is in development, with a dedicated team inside the Cabinet Office working to develop the proposals.
Costs in this Spending Review period will be met within the existing Spending Review settlements.
We are inviting the public to have their say in the upcoming consultation as we develop a safe, secure, and inclusive system for the UK. No final decisions will be made until after the consultation.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has assessed the potential implications for open justice of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal’s decision to bar the press and public from recent proceedings.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) is an independent statutory tribunal that hears cases of alleged misconduct by solicitors, registered European Lawyers, registered foreign lawyers, and employees of solicitors’ firms.
The SDT is committed to upholding the principles of open justice. Its default position is that hearings should be held in public and that any departure from this principle must be justified as an exception. Rule 35 of the Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2019 governs the SDT's power to hold a private hearing and stipulates the specific exceptions where hearings may be private. The primary ground for holding a private hearing is exceptional hardship or prejudice to a party, witness, or affected person. In addition, a private hearing may be necessary where a public hearing would prejudice the interests of justice. Details of the SDT’s approach to conducting hearings, or parts of a hearing, in private are available here: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/resource/policy-public-private-hearings/.
Whilst the Ministry of Justice does not intervene in individual cases or decisions of the SDT, we keep the underlying legislative framework under review to ensure it continues to provide an effective and transparent disciplinary system.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what documents provide the record of proceedings of an employment tribunal hearing for cases heard before the Presidential Practice Direction of November 2023.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Prior to November 2023, the record of proceedings typically consisted of the Employment Judge’s handwritten or typed notes taken during the hearing.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to her oral contribution of 22 April 2025, Official Report, column 911, what her Department's requisite level of accuracy is for AI transcriptions of court trials.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
It is imperative that court transcripts are of a very high standard, and redacted as may be required, to provide an accurate record of official proceedings and in order to safeguard the interests of the parties, witnesses and victims. The production of Crown Court transcripts is currently a manual process delivered by third-party suppliers. Under the contract, suppliers are required to produce transcripts to 99.5% accuracy. We are targeting a similar level of accuracy in AI transcripts. We are actively exploring opportunities to use technology to reduce the cost of transcripts in future, but a high degree of accuracy will be of paramount importance.