Asked by: Bradley Thomas (Conservative - Bromsgrove)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of processing times for paper probate application; and what steps he is taking to help improve the processing time for paper applications inline with wait times for digitally submitted applications.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Processing times for paper applications have improved significantly, but we recognise that they need to improve further. Paper applications are often more complex and may require additional enquiries where they cannot be issued on the first examination, which can affect overall timeliness. HM Courts & Tribunals Service has therefore invested in more staff in 2026, alongside system process improvements and a programme of upskilling to improve the processing time for paper applications.
Asked by: Andrew Snowden (Conservative - Fylde)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure timely and accurate access to magistrates court listings and registers for the public and media following the deletion of the Courtsdesk archive.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The starting point is there has been no deletion of the Courtsdesk “archive”.
Magistrates’ court listing and registers data continues to be available online, by email, in courts, and over the phone.
Work is underway to improve the way in which Magistrates and Crown court lists are available. First, we have launched a market engagement exercise for new providers to reuse our data under a new licensing regime (which would be open to Courtsdesk to apply for); second, in the interim, we have contacted Courtsdesk, and I have met with its CEO, with a view to potentially reestablishing their service provided they can demonstrate they will comply with our data protection requirements; third, by the end of March we will be expanding the Court and Tribunal Hearings (CaTH) service, an online portal which allows journalists and the public to access and search court-related information. By the end of March, CaTH will include Magistrates’ and Crown Court lists alongside the Civil, Family and Tribunal hearing lists already published.
Court records have always been, and will remain, available through formal requests to the relevant court.
Asked by: Helen Morgan (Liberal Democrat - North Shropshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to improve co-ordination between court staff, prison staff and policing staff.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government recognises the importance of different Departments working collaboratively. The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice chairs the Criminal Justice Board to facilitate collaboration between all criminal justice system partners, including the police, HM Courts & Tribunals Service and HM Prison & Probation Service.
The Ministry of Justice also provides guidance to and opportunities for engagement between Local Criminal Justice Boards.
In tandem, the Government is considering the recommendations in Part II of Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts relating to the co-ordination between CJS partners and will respond to them in the coming months.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans his department has to address the potential misuse of legal proceedings for purposes associated with Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on Friday 13 February to Question 111038.
Asked by: Kieran Mullan (Conservative - Bexhill and Battle)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps she is taking to maintain the CourtsDesk database of court records.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Courtsdesk does not have a database of, or access to, court records. Criminal court case records are held in a variety of places including at individual courts, at The National Archives and by the Ministry of Justice. Neither the Ministry of Justice nor HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) are deleting any court records. They have always been, and will remain, available through formal requests to the relevant court.
Courtsdesk has developed a historic database using courts listing data. There has been no deletion on this database.
The Ministry of Justice is doing three things: first, we have launched a market engagement exercise for new providers to reuse our data under a new licensing regime (which would be open to Courtsdesk to apply for); second, in the interim, we have contacted Courtsdesk, and I have met with its CEO, with a view to potentially reestablishing their service provided they can demonstrate they will comply with our data protection requirements; third, by the end of March we will be expanding the Court and Tribunal Hearings (CaTH) service, an online portal which allows journalists and the public to access and search court-related information. By the end of March, CaTH will include Magistrates’ and Crown Court lists alongside the Civil, Family and Tribunal hearing lists already published.
Court records have always been, and will remain, available through formal request to the relevant court.
Asked by: Andrew Snowden (Conservative - Fylde)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will set out the specific data protection concerns cited by HM Courts & Tribunals Service in its November 2025 cessation notice to Courtsdesk; and what assessment he has made of the reasons that data protection concerns could not be resolved without requiring deletion of the archive.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The concerns which led to the cessation of data sharing with Courtsdesk were based on the unauthorised sharing of HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) data with another party outside of the terms of the arrangement. Courtsdesk agreed under the terms of its pilot arrangement with HMCTS not to provide data to another company without notification to or authorisation by HMCTS. It acted outside the terms of that agreement by sharing data with a third-party AI company. The data provided to the other party without authorisation included sensitive, personally identifiable information of individuals involved in criminal cases, such as their full name, address and date of birth.
HMCTS takes seriously its responsibility to handle data safely to protect those people whose data it holds, and this left termination of the arrangement as the most appropriate course of action.
There has been no deletion of the archive
The Ministry of Justice is doing three things: first, we have launched a market engagement exercise for new providers to reuse our data under a new licensing regime (which would be open to Courtsdesk to apply for); second, in the interim, we have contacted Courtsdesk, and I have recently met with its CEO, with a view to potentially reestablishing their service provided they can demonstrate they will comply with our data protection requirements; third, by the end of March we will be expanding the Court and Tribunal Hearings (CaTH) service, an online portal which allows journalists and the public to access and search court-related information. By the end of March, CaTH will include Magistrates’ and Crown Court lists alongside the Civil, Family and Tribunal hearing lists already published.
Asked by: Mike Wood (Conservative - Kingswinford and South Staffordshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the oral contribution of the Minister for Courts and Legal Services of 10 February 2026, Official Report, Column 707, for what reason the data protection breach was sufficient to terminate the contract but did not meet the threshold for an Information Commissioner referral.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice is committed to protecting the personal and sensitive information entrusted to us. The agreement which Courtsdesk entered into with HMCTS specified that it would not pass data on to any party other than journalists without the permission of HMCTS. Courtsdesk acted outside the terms of that agreement by sharing data with a third party AI company. It did not seek HMCTS’ permission to use the data in that way. In those circumstances, it was entirely appropriate to suspend the arrangement between HMCTS and Courtsdesk.
Data protection officials considered that the circumstances did not meet the threshold required for referral to the Information Commissioner’s Office. The Ministry of Justice is committed to open justice as well as the responsible use of data and protecting data privacy. Our approach in this matter vindicates those principles.
Asked by: Elsie Blundell (Labour - Heywood and Middleton North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to help support female victims within the courts system.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with victims waiting years for justice. On 25 February 2026, the Deputy Prime Minister announced the Courts and Tribunals Bill, aiming to deliver faster, fairer justice for victims. These reforms are designed to progress cases more quickly through the criminal courts, reduce uncertainty, and increase transparency for victims and witnesses by ensuring more effective triage across the system. We will also implement crucial reforms, recommended by the Law Commission, to ensure that victims are no longer unfairly undermined by evidence in the court room.
This Government is committed to ensuring female victims have the information and support they need to navigate the criminal justice system. We have recently launched a consultation on a new Victims’ Code to ensure we get the foundations for victims right. The Victims and Courts Bill will additionally provide a new route for victims to request information via a dedicated helpline, which will give victims confidence about the routes available to receive information about their offender’s release.
We have made the largest ever investment of £550 million in victim support services over the next three years. The 42 Police and Crime Commissioners in England and Wales receive annual grant funding from the Ministry of Justice’s victim and witness budget to commission local practical, emotional, and therapeutic support services for victims of all crime types. This includes ‘core’ funding, which is for PCCs to allocate at their discretion, based on their assessment of local need as well as funding that is ring-fenced for sexual violence and domestic abuse services. Local assessments will incorporate considerations of the volume and needs of female victims of crime.
In addition, we continue to fund the long-standing Witness Service. This provides on-the-day emotional and practical support to witnesses (including those who are victims) to help them give their best evidence. This may include providing information about the court and its processes, facilitating explanations around any delays and accompanying the witness (if allowed by the court) into the court room when they give evidence.
Asked by: Lisa Smart (Liberal Democrat - Hazel Grove)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what evaluation criteria he is using to assess the impact of the Domestic Abuse Protection Order pilot on people against whom orders are sought.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Domestic Abuse Protection Order Notices and Orders (DAPNs and DAPOs) have been piloted in selected areas since November 2024, and are being fully evaluated, which will help to inform implementation as the orders are rolled out across England and Wales.
Reoffending and revictimisation are the key criteria for the impact evaluation, which will aim to quantitatively assess whether, and how, the new orders reduce these outcomes. A complementary process evaluation will aim to examine the implementation of DAPNs and DAPOs and explore perceptions of their effectiveness across different stakeholder groups.
Asked by: Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to improve HM Courts and Tribunal Service response times in cases which require referral for expert probate examination.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts & Tribunals Service has invested in more staff in 2026, alongside system process improvements and a programme of upskilling new and existing staff to conduct more specialist examiner work. This will improve the timeliness for applications that require referral to a more experienced probate case worker.