To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Bankruptcy: Courts
Friday 29th October 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether it is his policy that all bankruptcy hearings are held in London courts; whether options are available for such hearings to be held on a regional basis; and if he will make a statement.

Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

The case management and listing of cases is a Judicial function.

The Business & Property Courts hear cases in London as well as in seven regional centres across England and Wales (Birmingham, Manchester, Cardiff, Bristol, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle). Bankruptcy cases can be heard in those centres, as well as in District Registries (for Bankruptcy petitions issued in the High Court where the debtor lives outside London). In the case of lower value petitions, certain county courts also have bankruptcy jurisdiction.

The statutory committee which makes the rules in relation to Insolvency proceedings is chaired by the Judiciary and independent of Government. Parties are able to make an application to court to elect where their case is heard and there is encouragement for matters to be heard locally in the regions.


Written Question
Magistrates: Re-employment
Tuesday 29th June 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

If he will take steps to invite all magistrates under the age of 75 who were automatically retired at the age of 70 to state whether or not they wish to rejoin the Bench.

Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

When the new judicial mandatory retirement age comes into force, there will be a transitional provision to enable retired magistrates to apply to return to the bench, subject to business need.

We will be contacting recently retired magistrates later this year to invite them to express their interest in rejoining the bench.


Written Question
Magistrates
Monday 21st June 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 17 March 2021 to Question 170517 on the reinstatement, after the enactment of forthcoming legislation, of retired magistrates between the ages of 70 and 75, whether (a) all such magistrates will be invited individually to indicate whether they wish to return to the Bench and (b) the transitional process for those magistrates to be reinstated will provide for (i) preference to be given to the most senior magistrates who are willing to travel to courts throughout designated areas facing backlogs of cases, (ii) decisions on reinstatement to be taken at regional level and not at the level of individual courts to maximise (A) availability and (B) flexibility in the deployment of the most experienced reinstated magistrates and (iii) use to be made of the network of Justices' Training, Approvals, Authorisations and Appraisals Committees in managing the return and reallocation of magistrates who retired at age 70 but are about to become eligible for reinstatement.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

When the new mandatory retirement age (MRA) comes into force, there will be a transitional provision to enable retired magistrates to apply to return to the bench, subject to business need. The process by which such applications are to be made and considered will be set out in due course.


Written Question
Parole Board: Meetings
Thursday 17th June 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reason the (a) hearings and (b) deliberations of the Parole Board for England and Wales are not held in public; and if he will take steps to alter this policy in the interests of (i) transparency and (ii) accountability.

Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

It is a statutory requirement under the terms of the current Parole Board Rules for all hearings to be heard in private. That gives the Parole Board no flexibility to consider holding a public hearing even where that may be justified in all the particular circumstances of the case. In February, following a public consultation last year, the Government announced its intention to amend the current rules so that hearings can be held in public when the Parole Board determines it would be in the interests of justice to do so. These changes will be made to the Parole Board Rules later this year.

This is being taken forward as part of the root and branch review of the parole system which was launched in October 2020. The Terms of Reference for the review, and one of the government’s priorities, includes looking at ways to increase the transparency and openness of the parole system so as to improve public confidence and accountability. We plan to build on previous reforms to improve transparency, such as the introduction of Parole Board decision summaries in 2018 which provide reasons for its decisions, mainly to victims. The review is due to report later this year and will set out how the new transparency measures and other reforms to the parole system will be implemented.


Written Question
Magistrates
Monday 22nd March 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 11 March to Question 164329 on reinstating recently retired magistrates under 75 years of age who wish to rejoin the Bench, if he will set up an application process based on establishing a regional pool of magistrates who can (i) be called upon at short notice to support different courts in a given area, and (ii), in the case of highly experienced, recently retired Presiding Justices, assist in the conducting of JP appraisals.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

When the new mandatory retirement age comes into force, there will be a transitional provision to enable retired magistrates to apply to return to the bench, subject to business need. The process by which such applications are to be made and considered will be set out in due course.


Written Question
Magistrates: Retirement
Thursday 11th March 2021

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the answer of the Under Secretary of State to the Rt Hon Member for New Forest East on 20 January 2021, Official Report, col 980, on reinstating recently retired magistrates, if he will make it his policy to permit people aged 70 or over to resume their duties if this would enable them to serve for a significant further period prior to reaching any newly-raised maximum age for magistrates to continue in post.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

On 8 March 2021 the government announced its intention to legislate to increase the mandatory retirement age for judicial office holders, including magistrates, to 75. The legislation will include a transitional provision to enable retired magistrates to apply to return to the bench, subject to business need. The process by which such applications are to be made and considered will be set out in due course.


Written Question
Magistrates' Courts: Coronavirus
Tuesday 8th December 2020

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answers of 2 July 2020 to Questions 65895 on Magistrates' Retirement Ages and Question 65896 on Court Backlogs, what his latest estimate is of the increase in the average time taken to bring cases to trial in magistrates courts; for what reason emergency legislation has not been brought forward to allow experienced magistrates to sit beyond the age of 70 until the backlog of cases has been reduced to an acceptable level; and if he will make it his policy to ensure by introducing primary legislation if necessary that such magistrates are not lost to the justice system on reaching the age of 70.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

Due to COVID-19, it has not been possible to produce criminal court timeliness estimates for Q1 and Q2 of 2020. However, timeliness estimates for magistrates’ courts are expected to be published later this month as part of the Q3 2020 Criminal Court Statistics.

As a result of the recovery work undertaken, we are listing more summary trials every week than we were prior to the pandemic. Our capacity is not currently limited by the number of magistrates. Every week we are sitting more sessions in the magistrates’ courts than in the same period in 2019.

Since August, we have been sitting additional magistrates’ courts on a Saturday and have dealt with thousands of cases in the additional court sessions. During this time, magistrates’ courts have been consistently completing more cases than they have received and reduced the number of outstanding cases.

The public consultation on proposals to raise the mandatory retirement age for most judicial office holders, including magistrates closed on 16 October and analysis of the 1000 responses from the magistracy, the judiciary, and stakeholders is well underway. The government intends to publish the government response as soon as practicable with a view to legislate for any change required at the earliest opportunity.


Written Question
Magistrates: Retirement
Friday 3rd July 2020

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to his oral contribution of 9 June 2020, Official Record, column 150, to the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner, on retirement ages for magistrates, what form will the proposed consultation take; when that consultation will (a) open and (b) close; what degree of urgency will be applied in the light of the backlog of cases resulting from the effects on the court system of the covid-19 pandemic; and if he will make it his policy temporarily to suspend the existing retirement age for (i) magistrates and (ii) the wider judiciary, in order to process that backlog in a timely manner.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

We will be issuing a public consultation on proposals to raise the mandatory retirement age for most judicial office holders, including magistrates in the near future.

Many judges can already be authorised to sit past the mandatory retirement age but this provision does not exist for magistrates. Primary legislation would be required to amend the mandatory retirement age or to enable magistrates to temporarily sit beyond the existing mandatory retirement age.


Written Question
Magistrates' Courts
Thursday 2nd July 2020

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the rate of escalation of cases awaiting trial in magistrates courts; what the size of the backlog has been in each of the last three months; what recent assessment he has made of the likelihood of witnesses' testimonies being held to be reliable, if up to five years elapse between alleged offence and the accused facing trial; what the effect of such delay is likely to have on public confidence in the Justice system; and if he will take steps, on a temporary basis if necessary, to reduce that backlog.

Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)

The work to reduce the backlog is moving at pace so we can continue to increase the number of trials. More than 150 courts remained fully open to the public throughout the pandemic and by the middle of July all court centres will have reopened. We have prioritised the most urgent cases, such as domestic abuse and COVID-19 related cases, to keep the public safe, and the interests of victims and witnesses are continually considered as a part of the reopening of courts.

Data showing the number of outstanding cases in the Magistrates Court is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/hmcts-weekly-management-information-during-coronavirus-march-to-may-2020

A courts recovery plan has been published which will sets out the urgent next steps that we are taking to increase capacity in the courts: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/court-and-tribunal-recovery-update-in-response-to-coronavirus


Written Question
Suicide: Armed Forces
Wednesday 1st July 2020

Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to instruct the Coroner's Service to ascertain and record, in all cases of suicide, whether the deceased was a (a) present or (b) former member of the (i) Regular Armed Forces or (ii) Reserves.

Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

Every suicide is a tragedy and we take the welfare of our service men and women, whether veterans or current members of the Armed Forces or Reserves, very seriously.

The Government recognises that personal information about victims of suicide can be used to improve understanding of “at risk” groups and, from that, to support better targeted interventions. But for data on suicides amongst veterans and serving members of the Armed Forces or Reserves to be of value, the information collected must be reliable, consistent and comprehensive. For a number of practical and administrative reasons, including the parameters of the coroner’s role, this isn’t possible in the context of coroner suicide conclusions and there are no plans, therefore, to require coroners to record whether the deceased had served in the Armed Forces or Reserves.

The Chief Coroner has given coroners clearer guidance so that deaths, including suicide, are recorded more consistently.